Skip to main content

Full text of "An Agorist Primer"

See other formats


AN 
AGORIST 
PRIMER 



This PDF copy of An Agorist Primer was created 
from the original proof of the KoPubCo hardback 
first edition and is the only officially authorized and 
authentic electronic copy of the book by Samuel 
Edward Konkin III. 

Accept no substitutes! A paperback version will also 
be available in Summer 2009. 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Books by Samuel Edward Konkin III 

Available from KoPubCo 

An Agorist Primer 
New Libertarian Manifesto 
The Legend of Anarcho Claus 

Forthcoming from KoPubCo 

Rann Gold: Dragon's Bane 
Counter Economics 



2 



AN 
AGORIST 
PRIMER 

by 

Samuel Edward Konkin III 



ggma 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



[PDF copy of KoPubCo] 1st Edition, Dec. 2008 

ISBN 10 0-9777649-4-X [of the hardback] 
ISBN 13 978-0-9777649-4-5 [of the hardback] 

Published by arrangement with the author. 

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be re- 
produced, emitted, or transmitted in any form by any 
means — electronic or mechanical, including photocopy- 
ing, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval 
system — without permission in writing from the publisher. 

KoPubCo 

publishing division of The Triplanetary Corporation 
5942 EdingerAve., Ste. 113-164 
Huntington Beach, California 92649 
www.kopubco.com 

KOPUBCO and the KoPubCo and Triplanetary colo- 
phons are trademarks of the Triplanetary Corporation. 

Printed by Lightning Source, Inc. 

Cover designed by Black Dawn Graphics 



4 



This book is dedicated to 
Teny Rule Fisher, Thelma Rule, and 
John Fragnito, without whom this book 
would not have happened. 

Most of all, though, this book 

is dedicated to my son, 
Samuel Edward Konkin IV, 
to whom I offer this blueprint 
for liberty as his legacy. 



Table of Contents 



Preface 8 

Publisher's Note 9 

Introduction 10 

Chapter One: Economics 14 

Chapter Two: Applied Economics 24 

Chapter Three: Counter-Economics 39 

Chapter Four: Applied Counter-Economics ...46 

Chapter Five: Libertarianism 53 

Chapter Six: Applied Libertarianism 59 

Chapter Seven: Agorism 71 

Chapter Eight: Applied Agorism 90 

Afterword 99 

About the Author 102 

Other Works of SEK3 103 



AN 
AGORIST 
PRIMER 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Preface 




deas evolve and grow. At some point, an idea con- 
nects with so many other concepts that it becomes 
central to a way of thinking — an ideology. 



At some state of an ideology's life, between its 
birth and death, it reaches a level of maturity such 
that someone is motivated to divert his efforts from 
expanding it outward and upward and begins to 
look downward. That is, the theoretician pauses to 
pass on the knowledge to those not specializing in 
theoretical development. Perhaps the theoretician 
is reminded for whom he developed the ideology in 
the first place. 

Agorism is a way of thinking about the world 
around you, a method of understanding why things 
work the way they do, how they do, and how they 
can be dealt with — how you can deal with them. 

Agorism was meant to improve the lot of everyone, 
not a chosen elite or unwashed underclass. Hence an 
introductory work that presents ideas without going 
through the long intellectual history and conflict of 
competing ideas that produced them. As the creator 
of agorism, it is most incumbent on me first to at- 
tempt to reduce it to basic intelligibility. I hope my 
efforts find some small reward. 

— Samuel Edward Konkin III 



8 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Publisher's Note 

Samuel Edward Konkin III wrote An Agorist 
Primer in 1986. A small number of Xerox 
copies were circulated to investors in the 
hope that they would finance the publication of 
a high-quality, hardcover edition. Though some 
money was raised, it proved insufficient to produce 
the book. Even though the photocopies bore text 
reading "First Edition", it was meant to refer to 
the proposed hardback edition. This, then — the 
book you hold in your hands — is the true first 
edition as SEK3 intended it. 

An effort has been made to update the book 
in order to keep it relevant, though none of the 
timeless — and timely — agorist philosophy has 
been altered. Such archaic terms as "videotapes" 
and "cassettes" have been replaced by "DVDs" and 
"downloads". Information about major wars since 
1986 have been added, staying — we hope — in 
the spirit of SEK3's other analyses. Notice has 
been taken of the collapse of Communism, brought 
about in no small part by Counter-Economics. 

Any mistakes, failures to catch archaisms, or 
errors of analysis added to the original text are 
entirely the fault of the current editor and not of 
the late author. — V.K. 



9 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Introduction 

Agorism can be denned simply: it is thought 
and action consistent with freedom. The 
moment one deals with "thinking," "act- 
ing," "consistency," and especially "freedom," 
things get more and more complex. 

Hold on to the virtue of consistency. The refusal to 
compromise, to deceive oneself, to "sell out" or to "be 
realistic" created agorism. Consider "being realistic." 
This usually implies that theory is fine for thinking, 
but in practice one must deal with reality. Agorists 
believe that any theory which does not describe 
reality is either useless or a deliberate attempt by 
intellectuals to defraud non-specialists. 

When someone urges you to be realistic, may 
you pick an agorist book to get the best descrip- 
tion you can find of how agorism actually works. 
If you want to find books and articles that will 
"fake reality" for wishes, whims, fears, and spite, 
look for labels such as "Liberal," "Conservative," 
"Socialist," "Communist," "Fascist," or — worst of 
all — "middle of the road" and "moderate." 
Reality knows no moderation; it is — all the way. 
One way of thinking came close to agorism 
and is fairly well-known today; we will deal with 
Libertarianism later in some detail. An ideology 



10 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

of Liberty, it had to choose at one point between 
consistency with reality and being the "politics of 
liberty." It chose the latter: the contradiction of 
seeking political power over others to eliminate 
political power over others. 

Those who continued to seek liberty consis- 
tently and without the practical contradiction of 
Libertarians became agorists. This is a second, 
historical definition for you. 

Agorism is an ideology, then, but it is also a sci- 
entific and definitely materialist way of thinking. 
It is not a religious view — save that it believes 
absolute freedom to be moral — nor does it wish 
to displace anyone's religious views — unless they 
lead to slavery. Agorism wants no "true believers" 
in the sense of blind followers. Like any scientifi- 
cally based mode of thought, it will evolve as does 
our understanding of reality. One who has faith 
in something proven false that was once a tenet 
of agorism is not an agorist. 

Reality is our standard. Nature is our lawgiver. 

In a general sense, agorism is scientific in that 
it bases itself on verifiable observations about 
reality. But it is scientific in a specific sense as 
well. It may be hard for chemists, physicists, and 
engineers to believe that a "hard science" was ever 
developed in fields such as economics and political 
science; but the discovery of this science by me — 
a hard-bitten theoretical chemist, cynical of "soft" 
science — led eventually through libertarianism 
to agorism. 

The study of human action (praxeology)* pro- 



11 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

duced some repeatable observations deserving the 
title of scientific law. The area of human action 
dealing with exchanges between acting humans 
(catallactics)* covers the same area of thought that 
economics is supposed to cover, but often with very 
different conclusions. 

This kind of economics (sometimes called Aus- 
trian economics)* was used by speculators such 
as Harry Browne and Doug Casey for investing 
in hard-money instruments, beating taxes, and 
surviving when society around them is operating 
on unreason and folly. It is that potent, a tool for 
survival amidst gloom and doom. 

However, it can be more. By applying this economic 
understanding to all human action regardless of the 
wishes, whims, fears, and spite of the most powerful 
agency in society — the State (coercive government) 
— a new field of theory dealing only with practical 
action emerges: Counter- Economics. 

Finally, when libertarian theory meets Counter- 
Economics, what comes out — in strict consistency, 
both external and internal — is Agorism. This is 
still another definition. 

And this is the definition with which I feel 
most comfortable, the one that the thieves of the 
intellect find hardest to pervert or steal: Agorism 
is the consistent integration of libertarian theory 



*If this area of study appeals to you, by all means 
go to the source: Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises. 
You'll find all the terms starred herein are derived and 
denned in detail. 



12 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

with counter-economic practice; an agorist is one 
who acts consistently for freedom and in freedom. 

A basic understanding of agorism falls natu- 
rally into four phases of integration or four steps 
of learning. In addition to grasping the premises 
involved, one should be able to apply them. Re- 
member always that agorism integrates theory 
and practice. Theory without practice is game- 
playing; taken seriously, it leads to withdrawal 
from reality, mysticism, and insanity. Practice 
without theory is robotic; taken seriously, it leads 
to tilling barren soil and showing up for work at 
closed factories. Perhaps it would help to think of 
theory as wedded to practice where divorce leads 
to ruin. Or the relationship could be viewed as 
that between brain and stomach or mind and body: 
neither can survive without the other. 

So four concepts and four applications lead 
naturally to eight chapters. 

The author and publisher welcome your ques- 
tions because they will indicate where we can 
clarify and improve subsequent editions. 



13 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter One 
Economics 



Y7 



conomics is a dismal science. Those under- 
~H standing certain economic concepts profit 
^/flamboyantly. Economics is a tool corpo- 



rations and governments use to control society. 
Those understanding economic concepts have 
toppled governments that refuse to face the very 
same concepts. Economics is a meaningless college 
exercise. Speculators understanding economics 
make millions of dollars and save others from 
financial ruin. Here is our problem: all the above 
statements are true. 

If that makes you think there's an inconsistency 
in the use of Economics, you are correct. With a 
lower-case "e," economics is the study of relations 
between people involving goods and services. With 
a capital "E," Economics is an institution financed 
mostly by government and its tax-privileged foun- 
dations. With foundation money, this institution 
controls — however imperfectly — those who 
would learn and teach economics at government 
schools or private colleges. 

Maybe this appears to be a big deal made out 
of little; after all, is not most of chemistry and 



14 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

astronomy and mathematics also institutional- 
ized? Imagine the case where only "pro- government 
chemistry," "conservative astronomy," or "socialist 
biology" was taught and those who tried to teach 
straight science were vilified as crackpots. Fan- 
tastic? Lysenko's pseudo-biology was taught in 
the Soviet Union because it was more in line with 
Marxist theory than was straight genetics. Cur- 
rently, Man-Made Global Warming is approach- 
ing the status of state-approved climatology, with 
dissenters shouted down, de-funded, smeared as 
apologists for polluters, and even threatened with 
the recision of their academic degrees. 

Perhaps you will grant that government can use 
its control of schools and colleges to teach a twisted 
version of economics. Could, then, better econom- 
ics be taught if government were improved? The 
answer is, "not a chance!" As you will see in Chap- 
ter Six, if people understood economics, coercive 
government could not survive. (And uncoercive 
government is a contradiction in terms.) 

What we wish to accomplish in this chapter is 
simply to give you a basic understanding of real 
economics. No, this is not just to help explain the 
rest of this book; with even an elementary un- 
derstanding of economics, fewer con games can 
defraud you — especially the high stakes, politi- 
cal kind. 

Let us start with why people act economically. 



15 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Value 

Right down there at the very bottom, we be- 
gin. Human beings act. Why? Ludwig Von 
Mises said it best: to remove felt unease. If you 
were perfectly content, nothing and no one nagging at 
you, and you knew that if you did nothing you could 
continue to be content, would you move? Remember, 
moving from this state would increase unhappiness. 
Of course you wouldn't move. Even if you said you 
would move to relieve boredom, you would be violating 
the hypothesis. You would be more bored by moving 
since that is an increase in unhappiness. 

Aha! Is that not a contradiction? you rightfully 
ask. Correct. And if an assumption leads to a con- 
tradiction, it is wrong. Our assumption was that 
you could achieve a state of ease; therefore, such 
a human condition is impossible. 

In reality, man always has reason to feel unease: 
to feed himself, clothe himself, shelter himself, 
reproduce, and feed, shelter, and clothe others, 
amuse himself, and so on. Unease cannot be elimi- 
nated. It can, however, be reduced. It can also, 
unfortunately, be augmented. 

If you seek to starve yourself or bore yourself, 
you increase your unease. Some actions you per- 
form achieve negative goals; some achieve positive 
ones. Those which remove felt unease are values. 

If someone else has something that will remove 
your unease but taking it will increase theirs, we 



16 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

have a conflict in values. This conflict in values 
need not arise from direct confrontation. Suppose 
you and another are offered a scrumptious dessert, 
and the other is dieting desperately. You value it; 
the other disvalues it. 

Value is subjective. This simple insight, made by 
Carl Menger (teacher of Von Mises), revolution- 
ized primitive economics and cured many of the 
problems plaguing the science since Adam Smith. 

Had Marx heeded Menger, socialism would have 
been abandoned. 

Subjective value leads to individualism. It also 
explains so powerfully why people trade and 
it demolishes theories of "exploitation". Before 
subjective value, Marx could look at the work of 
Adam Smith — who thought value arose from the 
amount of labor one put into producing something 
— and see no productive role for anyone but labor- 
ers, concluding that all the others must be para- 
sites. There are parasites in our system, economics 
tells us, and we shall use our new understanding 
to ferret them out in the next chapter. 

Finally, when people trade, they are acting to 
remove felt unease in both directions. You may 
give up a smaller value for a larger but never the 
other way around — voluntarily. If you're willing 
to let your brother work for you and pay him "more 
than he's worth," you know that this means, to 
you, "he's worth extra because he's my brother." 
You've still gained a greater value. 

If values were not subjective, why would anyone 
trade? We would all value things equally and be 



17 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

content with what we had. Well, not entirely; we 
could also want more of a value. Onward, then, to 
the next powerful economic concept. 

Marginal Utility 

Suppose you, being a shepherd, had ten sheep, 
and a nice woolen coat you laboriously made 
from your eleventh sheep. If someone came along 
and offered you a coat just like it for your tenth 
sheep, you'd tell them to buzz off. Along comes a 
rich shepherd and sees your coat. You tell him 
how you got it and even tell him how to make one. 
He can think of better things to do than to make 
a coat, but he'd like to have one. He'll trade you a 
sheep for a coat. 

No better off subjectively, you refuse. He offers you 
two and you know you'd be ahead: you can make an- 
other coat and have eleven sheep again. Meanwhile, 
the rich shepherd would rather have 98 sheep and 
a coat than a hundred sheep and no coat. 

But this example so far is still one of subjective 
value. His final offer is three sheep. Joyfully, you 
accept. As you are leaving, you run into another 
poor shepherd with ten sheep and a coat. (There 
seems to be a lot of this going on.) 

He offers you coat for sheep and is willing to 
accept two sheep. You're still ahead — eleven 
sheep and the coat! And you don't have to make 
it yourself. Such a deal! 

Using the wool coat as our medium of exchange, 
we find out something interesting. Sheep are sheep 



18 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

(as far as this example is concerned) yet while you 
traded your eleventh sheep for a coat and would 
not have traded your tenth, you did trade both 
your twelfth and thirteenth sheep for a coat. This 
principle where you value each additional unit 
less and less is called marginal utility. (You are 
operating at the margin and "utility" is an older 
word for value.) 

All sheep (and dollars) are not alike; marginal 
ones are cheaper. Besides giving us an idea which 
can handle more in economics, and also help us 
to spot frauds such as tax redistribution (see next 
chapter), marginal utility leads directly to the 
next concept. 

Division of Labor 

O ubjective value may lead us to think we would 



O'prefer producing some goods rather than oth- 
ers, or transporting them, trading them, serving 
them, or storing them. Yet it is marginal utility 
which tells us why this specialization works. If I 
produce ten cooked hamburgers an hour and you 
produce twelve, and we happen to eat the same, it 
is obvious who has more surplus to trade and will 
be eager to do so. I should check out other lines of 
productivity or move to a less desirable (at least 
to you) location where I can compete. 

This process, where we are led to specialize by 
greater productivity and greater reward (value- 
seeking), is called division of labor. Von Mises 
speculated that it was the glue holding society 




19 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

together; and if you think of society as bigger than 
a nuclear or extended family, he is right. 

If Jane sings beautifully, and we do not, division 
of labor is why I'm writing this book, eating your 
hamburgers, and we're listening to Jane on the radio. 

Basics 

ith such basic ideas as those about trade, 
exchange, goods and services that you 
(hopefully) already brought with you to this dis- 
cussion, added on to the concepts of subjective 
value, marginal utility, and division of labor, you 
are properly armed for understanding agorism. 
There is far more to economics and still more being 
discovered and written about by the (all too few) 
right kind of economists. 

Before moving on, there is one economic spe- 
cialty that deserves some extra attention. Since 
it is so much on everyone's minds, you probably 
guessed that it is money. 

Money 

oney is heavily mystified and it's not hard 
to see why. "A fool and his money are soon 
parted" is a truism nearly as old as money itself. 
If you can be confused as to what money is or how 
it works, you can be parted from it by those who 
know what money is. 

Remember our sheep example? We called the 
wool coat a medium of exchange to show the dif- 





20 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

ferent values of a sheep. But if we had many 
wool coats and one sheep being traded back and 
forth, we could use the same example to show the 
marginal utility of the eleventh coat (or whatever 
number happened to work) and the use of sheep 
as a medium of exchange. 

Straight trade of goods for goods — barter — is 
crude, and problems related to making change are 
difficult to solve. Sheep die and wool coats wear 
out; they do not store value well. And — since value 
is subjective — changes in your needs, tastes, and 
circumstances alter your values anyway. Nothing 
can store a changing quantity or, as math majors 
would say, fix a variable. 

What we would like is something that makes 
change, stores its value, and is universally accept- 
able (everyone wants it all the time). To be blunt, 
there is no such thing and never will be, though 
all bank directors, congressmen, and commissars 
might decree otherwise. Subjective value assures 
us of that. 

But suppose some substance could be divided 
down to its atoms without changing, be more resis- 
tant to wear and corrosion than almost anything 
else, be easily recognized and easily checked as 
to purity, and be valued already by a lot of people 
for its usefulness and good looks. Suppose further 
that it "did it better" than anything else offered 
in competition? 

Would not most people flock to it and make it 
money? No laws would need be passed or institu- 
tions founded or advertising campaigns conducted 



21 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

to make it so. Nature would take care of it. Second, 
third, and fourth choices might be used, but the 
first would be the standard by which the others 
were measured. 

Such a substance has been known for millennia. 
Gold, and its close chemical relatives platinum, 
silver, and copper, remains the choice of a free 
market. Even in an unfree market, where money 
is imposed by force against the will of traders (that 
is, by fiat), gold remains the money of the "under- 
ground economy" and of the "overseas economy" 
working around the fiat money. 

Why fiat money exists at all and what it has to 
do with inflation is an important topic in our next 
chapter. 

Value-Free Economics 

(Oo far we have avoided loaded terms such as 



0>"free market," "competitive economy," "free 
trade," "fair trade," and so on. The Austrian 
economists (Menger, von Mises, Eugen von Bohm- 
Bawerk and their students) believed economics 
should be a science free of such terms, a "value- 
free" (wertfrei) science. 

Science has values; try to engage in research 
without a commitment to truth or an affinity for 
reality. Many people hold values that are impos- 
sible to achieve in reality and are frustrated — 
they hurt themselves. Many people seek to gain 
values by misrepresenting reality to others; when 
they are challenged, they accuse the exposers of 




22 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

holding different, competing values. Thus "value- 
free scientists" — including economists — find they 
cannot remain forever neutral in their ivory towers. 

To the extent, though, that they try by keeping 
their own subjective values out of the way, they do 
accomplish much. The scientific method works. And 
being able to tell people that stealing from everyone 
and then giving it back to them will make them 
less well off is useful, not matter how unpopular. 

This is where the application of economics enters. 



23 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Two 
Applied Economics 

Agorism is more than economics, but agorist 
thinking is impossible without that basic 
understanding. Just applying the basic 
economics we have learned so far can sweep 
away a lot of misconceptions and eliminate a lot 
of confusion about how the world works. We also 
can deal with some of the misleading con jobs of 
Economics — however, explaining why Econom- 
ics is so twisted will have to wait until we apply 
libertarianism later. 

The Free Market 

Agorism upholds the free market. To under- 
stand why, one first needs to know what 
the free market is and what its alternatives are. 
Again, why is left for later. The term "agorism" 
is derived from the ancient Greek word agora, 
meaning an open market place. 

The market is not a single place or center. Goods 
and services are exchanged at the corner store, on 
the stock exchange, at a swap meet, in your back- 
yard, or across the Internet. Playing a game with 



24 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

a friend is not a market transaction, but foregoing 
the time that each of you could spend on working 
or buying or selling is a market transaction. 

All social interaction has a market component. 
Economics may be far more pervasive than we 
thought. It is difficult to imagine how we could 
have a free society — should we wish it — without 
a free market. Perhaps we should be clear with 
reference to what we mean by "free." 

Free means the absence of coercion. Coercion 
is threatening violence upon someone in order 
to make him surrender something. In a strictly 
value-free sense, then, coercive human action of- 
fers to create a greater disvalue to you if you do 
not yield up your lesser value. You gain nothing 
but lose less. 

Repeated application of coercion destroys val- 
ues. The coercer gains without producing anything 
of value and the victim always loses. Voluntary 
exchange, as we have seen, occurs when both feel 
a gain in subjective value. Unease is relieved in 
both directions. In coercive transactions, unease 
is increased. 

Retrieving your goods from the coercer with 
the threat of greater force and enough extra for 
your time and trouble at least wipes out your loss, 
although it leaves the original coercer with a net 
loss. At this point, he may finally become aware 
of the value destruction of coercion. Or he may 
simply decide he needs still greater force. (The 
biggest force of all in an area is usually the State, 
but we'll come to that later.) 



25 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Strictly speaking, the free market is the absence 
of all that coercion. If there were only a few "pri- 
vate thieves" and they were usually apprehended 
and forced to make restitution, something very 
close to a free market would exist. People would 
have locks, fences, alarms, and insurance policies 
and protection-agent policies, but would act oth- 
erwise on the assumption that they were free to 
give up their property to those of their choice and 
accept from others who gave freely to them. They 
could not plan on people changing their minds, 
but they could make contracts (exchanging a good 
here and now for one to be given later) so that if 
others changed their minds, some compensation 
would result. 

Planning and Chaos 

It quickly becomes clear that planning is far more 
practical in a free market than in a coerced mar- 
ket. If coercion becomes regular and predictable, 
innovative people find ways around it and soon 
enough join forces to evade the coercive regula- 
tions, frustrating and/or starving the coercer. (See 
the next chapter.) 

So new forms of coercion must be brought in 
and economic planning is disrupted once again. 

Some argue that a free market is Chaos; they 
see no one giving orders and so think that there 
is no order. In reality, a completely free market 
is a highly decentralized order. Each "cog" in the 
great machine keeps itself well-oiled and seeks 



26 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

to mesh itself with the other cogs in ever-better 
fits. An even better example is the human body. 
While the brain has some overall direction, it can- 
not instruct various cells to go about their ways 
delivering blood and building tissue and contract- 
ing muscle and transmitting energy. A disease or 
parasite may "direct" some cells to a common task 
— but this results in disruption of the natural or- 
der. Even without a "foreign invader," if the brain 
could force some cells to act other than naturally, 
the entire body would suffer by this imposed order 
and the body could die. 

The fallacy in "planned economics" is the error 
of assuming that order is imposed. Scientists are 
aware that order is something you look for in na- 
ture — it's already there. 

Economics tells us that attempts to impose order 
by coercion are destructive and chaotic, yet "economic 
planning" of the imposing kind is common to nearly 
all schools of Economics. We begin to see where the 
gap between economics and Economics lies. 

Competition and Monopoly 

It's nice if more than one person offers to trade 
the same thing with you. You usually can get a 
better deal. When more than one seller offers identi- 
cal goods, and when more than one buyer offers to 
acquire the same goods, pure competition exists. 

If only one buyer or seller is available, the buyer 
or seller is said to have a monopoly . 

Competition is always good in the sense that it 



27 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

maximizes value exchanges. Although it would 
take more theory to prove this, most people have 
had enough experience to accept the foregoing as 
a factual statement. 

Surely not all monopoly is bad? If we banned all 
monopoly, then Leonardo da Vinci would have had 
to give up painting what only he can paint. And the 
Beatles would have had to stop composing what 
only they can compose. In fact, since a little bit of 
"artistry" distinguishes all goods, pure competition 
is impossible. There are no identical products. 

Yet, for your subjective purposes, you can see 
no difference worth paying for among all sorts of 
goods. And they do not have to be all that similar. 
With fifteen dollars you might decide to buy a book 
you wished to spend the evening with. Finding 
the book sold, you consider a movie instead. The 
lines are too long, so you buy a six pack instead 
and go home. 

Someone else would have different goods com- 
peting for that fifteen dollars, even if he had 
started out trying to buy that same book. 

If I told you at this point that some Economists 
defined a "free market" as a "perfectly competitive" 
market, you might wonder when they lost their 
senses. After all, if people want to produce different 
things (remember division of labor), and are more 
productive doing so, you will not get "perfect com- 
petition" in the free market. You will have lots of 
competition by giving each human actor maximum 
freedom to explore his values and find alternatives. 

Now if I tell you that these Economists say that 



28 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



if a market is not "perfectly competitive," force 
should be used to make it so. You probably are 
beginning to wonder if I have not lost my senses. 
Whatever these Economists are after, it is not 
a free market. Nor will they generate any gains 
since values are always net-destroyed by coercion. 

Adam Smith defined monopoly as a grant of 
exclusive trading by the king. It was a royal privi- 
lege; that is, the State coerced some people not to 
produce goods when the king's friend was already 
doing so. Breaking up these forced monopolies was 
an issue for freedom-lovers and rightfully so. 

The problems arose when people stopped think- 
ing clearly — or had their thoughts muddled by 
Economists. Monopoly became bad, not because it 
was coercive, but because it was not competitive. 
Clear thinking and consistency lead us easily to 
realize that the opposite of forced monopoly and 
of forced competition is natural monopoly and free 
competition. The correct opposition is the coerced 
market vs. the free market. 



ne problem with monopoly we seemed to have 



\JJ overlooked: do not the "big get bigger" and the 
"small get driven out" even if the market is left 
alone? The answer is obvious empirically: histori- 
cally, it has never happened. There is extensive 
literature by the better sort of economists on 
many historical examples where businesses were 
accused of forming "trusts" — that is, attempting 



Cartels 




29 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

to monopolize one industry through cartels. 

Most cases, when State trustbusters were 
brought in to "break up" a large company, proved 
to have been instigated by smaller companies 
against a more efficient competitor. 

Cartels, as Dr. Murray Rothbard has beauti- 
fully shown, tend to break up from market forces. 
The most efficient cartel member can outsell his 
fellow members and has a tremendous incentive 
to "cheat" on the cartel agreement. He can "steal" 
the customers from his fellow members and soon 
does, "under the table." Upon discovery, his fellow 
cartel members fight back by cutting prices and 
the cartel disintegrates. 

In a coerced market, however, the cartel will 
run to someone to force compliance with the cartel. 
That someone is, in any realistic unfree market, 
the State. And once again we are back to the forced 
or State monopoly. 

Profit and Enterprise 

Sometimes the terms "free enterprise" and "capi- 
talism" are used to mean "free market." 
Capitalism means the ideology (ism) of capital or 
capitalists. Before Marx came along, the pure free- 
marketeer Thomas Hodgskin had already used the 
term capitalism as a pejorative; capitalists were trying 
to use coercion — the State — to restrict the market. 
Capitalism, then, does not describe a free market but 
a form of statism (see Chapter Five), like communism. 
Free enterprise can only exist in a free market 



30 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

and is an acceptable synonym, yet while the term 
market covers all human transactions, enterprise 
seems limited to certain types of business. And 
what about profit! Is it the result of "exploitation," 
enterprise, hard work, or something else? 

Applying economic knowledge here resolves the 
problem clearly but it will take a little effort to 
follow through. According to (Austrian) econom- 
ics, there are three productive functions in the 
marketplace: Labor, capital, and entrepreneur- 
ship. In the simplest, primitive economy, capital 
consists of tools, food you have stored to keep you 
going until your harvest comes in or you can sell 
the shoes you made, and storefronts or wagons to 
take your goods to market. Labor is the work you 
put into farming or shoemaking or whatever. 

Entrepreneurship is direction, the reins of the 
operation, deciding where to invest the capital 
and which and how many workers to hire. As the 
market progresses to greater wealth and complex- 
ity, we can see that the important components 
of entrepreneurship are risk-taking and innova- 
tion. Speculators, inventors, and artists (without 
patrons) are the best-known, fairly "pure" entre- 
preneurs. They take risks, create (1) a product 
that did not exist before, which turns out to have 
a demand; (2) a better product to replace one that 
existed before, winning away the demand; (3) a 
cheaper method of producing or marketing the 
same product, again winning away the demand. 

The gain resulting from pure entrepreneurship 
is profit. It is not the everyday return on investment 



31 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

that a businessman counts over his expenses and 
takes home. 

Windfall profits occur when there is a sudden 
change in market conditions, such as weather 
wiping out crops or producing bumper harvests, 
mineral and oil strikes suddenly coming onto the 
market or — when the market is not free — sud- 
den government interference in the marketplace. 
Those who make the most effort to anticipate the 
unexpected tend to make the most profits. 

Taking risks also means one can introduce prod- 
ucts no one wants, invent devices that are laughed 
away, and create artsy trash. Such creations incur 
negative profit (loss) and, alas, this is at least as 
common, historically, as profit. 

Nonetheless, without entrepreneurship — en- 
terprise — the economy would stagnate as people 
continue investing the same capital in the same 
way, over and over, and workers continue at the 
same jobs. When skilled laborers begin to die 
out and capital runs out of components, such as 
minerals at mines or new forests for timber, the 
economy would regress and collapse. 

Everyone is part laborer, pan capitalist, and 
part entrepreneur, but by division of labor we 
tend to specialize. There is nothing to prevent us 
from all being wealthy (some day, at any rate) 
and using our money (as James Garner put it so 
well in the film The Wheeler Dealers) as a way of 
keeping score in capital investment. And capital, 
in the form of ever-more-intelligent computers, 
can reduce labor to a vestigial activity (as neces- 



32 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

sary as the human appendix). Entrepreneurship, 
on the other hand, is increased, not decreased, 
by a progressive market. As our society becomes 
more complex and more wealthy, more people will 
specialize in entrepreneurial activity and more 
people must be free to do so. 

Entrepreneurship cannot be forced. When bu- 
reaucrats "plan," they spend their time finding 
ways of covering their posteriors and pass the 
losses on to the taxpayers. They fear replacement 
and since they reap little or no reward for success, 
they become timid about actually taking risks, and 
spend their time creating red tape entanglements 
designed to stymie innovation. 

Regulation 

f TT %ere is nothing positive to say about regula- 
JL tion. Regulation is coercion. It prevents subjec- 
tive values from being satisfied, "protecting" only 
those who do not wish to be protected and penal- 
izing only the law-abiding. Regulation destroys 
initiative and stifles innovation. Regulation stag- 
nates markets. Regulation can and does kill people 
when the regulators deny victims the right to take 
a chance with so-called risky medication. 

Regulation is motivated by fear, envy, and colos- 
sal ignorance. There is nothing that can protect 
innocent people more than a thorough education 
and a vigorous pursuit of fraud; yet regulation of 
advertising and experimentation destroys infor- 
mation transfer and regulation of quality merely 



33 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

certifies incompetent "professionals" and protects 
them from fraud charges. 

If all the regulation passed in any country you 
wish to name were completely obeyed, let alone 
enforced, we would all be dead. 

Consider a particularly pathological case in the 
United States of America. If you charge a price for 
your product higher than your competitors, this is 
taken as evidence under the Sherman Anti-Trust 
Act that you have a monopoly and charges may be 
brought against you. The same problem arises if 
you charge the same; that is considered evidence 
of a cartel and you and your competitors can all be 
fined. Finally, if you charge less than your com- 
petitors, you are violating the "Fair Trade" laws 
in most states and can be arrested and fined. It is 
impossible to obey all the regulations. 



Taxation 

r ][ %ere is a serious moral question about taxa- 
X. tion that we will leave for later. Let it suffice 
now to recognize that taxation takes something 
from someone against his or her will and is a vio- 
lation of his or her subjective values. Any specific 
form of taxation directs resources counter-entre- 
preneurially. In short, taxation has no place in a 
free market. 



34 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Interest 



T 



^here are three very closely related concepts 
in economics, and they have to do with capital, 
land, and money. It is often said that capital earns 
a rate of return on investment (remember, only 
entrepreneurs make profits), land earns rent, and 
money earns interest. With an efficient medium of 
exchange, an entrepreneur will quickly shift from 
capital goods of one type to another if the rate of 
return is higher in one sector of the market than 
the other. Land is a fixed form of capital, and — if 
we are in a free market — we should expect rent to 
come to equal the rate of return as in other invest- 
ments — assuming no risks (where profit would 
be added or subtracted). And so it is with interest. 

Originary interest is what money earns if you lend 
it out to an entrepreneur risk-free. Should you ac- 
cept risk yourself, you may add on a risk component, 
a form of profit. At the same level of risk, in a highly 
developed market, interest rates should stabilize 
and slowly decrease — as wealth increases. 

Only if something becomes powerful enough 
— coercive enough — to monopolize (by force) all 
the media of exchange (or money supply) and then 
increase it so that the value of each unit declines, 
will another component appear to increase the 
interest rate (regardless of risk). Conceivably it 
could decrease the money supply so that the value 
would be expected to increase and interest to be 



35 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

discounted. In an extreme case, this inflationary 
component could drive interest rates to zero or 
negative — that is, someone pays you to take his 
money and give it back to him later. Deflation is 
rare, as there is very little incentive for controllers 
of the money supply to deflate. 

Inflation 

"TT Tnderstanding how inflation works and what 



U to do about it made the fortunes of the "gold 
bugs" and investment analysts mentioned earlier. 
While there is considerable fog and confusion 
thrown around this subject, inflation is simple 
enough to understand if you follow our step-by- 
step logic and (always!) watch for inconsistencies. 

From Chapter One we know what money is. 
Free-market money could be affected by, say, a gold 
strike or, if for some reason the gold was all kept in 
a "Fort Knox," by James Bond's Goldfinger nuking 
it. Even then, there would be a brief dip or jump 
in the "price of gold" (the price of money is simply 
the inverse of the prices of everything bought with 
it), and stability would resume at the new level. In 
a worldwide market, the effect — even of nuking 
Fort Knox — would be barely noticeable. 

Inflation is the increase of the money supply. In- 
flation results only when the most powerful force 
in society — the State — commands a monopolistic 
fiat money system, creates legal tender laws (legal 
tender compels the monopoly, contracts are not up- 
held in other "tender" or money), and — with army 




36 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

and police to back it up — debases a form of money 
that was acceptable in the marketplace. 

States that have imposed fiat money from 
scratch (such as in newly emerging Third World 
countries) find their money rapidly rejected in fa- 
vor of foreign currency and gold. The usual route 
to inflation takes four steps: 1) Replacement of 
money by certificates for the money. A weight of 
gold or silver is replaced by a certificate claiming 
an ounce of gold or pound of silver in some pre- 
cious metal warehouse or "bank." 2) Legal defini- 
tion of possession of the certificate as equivalent 
to possessing the wealth. (The government gets 
into the act.) 3) Restriction of all exchanges (save 
primitive bartering) to the legal certificates; this is 
the creation of legal tender. 4) Issuing certificates 
without money to back them up. At this point we 
have fiat money and inflation. 

Inflation leads to crack-up booms (German in 
1923) and depressions (U.S. in 1929). This analy- 
sis is a bit more complicated and is best left to the 
more cataclysmic scenarios we'll present near the 
end of the book. 

Oh, and as you probably guessed, one result 
of inflation is a general rise in price level. Notice 
that some prices rise faster than others, and some 
even seem to drop. Only the distortion is common 
to all price changes. 



37 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



A Little Knowledge 

If you have mastered the first two chapters, con- 
gratulations! You will quickly discover two 
things by simply reading your daily newspaper 
or news blog or shooting the breeze with your 
acquaintances. 

First, you will discover the appalling level of 
ignorance with which most of society is afflicted. 
Be careful — some people get very irritable when 
challenged by someone who knows what he is 
talking about. A knowledgeable person might be 
tempted to use his knowledge to bilk the ignorant. 
Many people with only a little knowledge do just 
that. However, there are moral ways to profit by 
your understanding and, by all means, go to it. 

Second, you will discover that the appalling 
web of Statism is controlling — or attempting to 
control — nearly every aspect of human action. 
You will probably feel smothered and that is not 
surprising. You may also feel like giving up and 
giving in — but survival alone dictates otherwise. 

Survival — let alone prosperity — demands 
that you tear through the web of legislation and 
follow nature's laws instead. You must abandon 
Economics to the regulators and the political 
"businessmen" who play ball with them. You are 
left with the alternative: stifle yourself and starve 
or embrace Counter-Economics. 



38 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Three 
Counter-Economics 

e see that nearly every action is regu- 
lated, taxed, prohibited, or subsidized. 
Much of this Statism — for it is only 
the State that wields such power — is so contradic- 
tory that little ever gets done. If you cannot obey the 
(State's) laws and charge less than, more than, or 
the same as your competitor, what do you do? You go 
out of business or you break the law. Suppose paying 
your taxes would drive you out of business? You go 
out of business — or you break the law. 

Government laws have no intrinsic relationship with 
right and wrong or good and evil. Historically, most 
people knew that the royal edicts were for the king's 
good, not theirs. People went along with the king be- 
cause the alternative looked worse. This line of thinking 
leads to Chapter Five, so we'll just note here that even 
today, society recognizes the conscientious objector. 
the religious dissenter to laws that his deity forbids 
him to obey, the man or woman who follows the Law 
of God or Nature against the monopoly of force in 
society. Since they would rather die than submit, a 
society which restrains its government from heavy 
repression will exempt many objectors. 




39 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



But everyone is a resister to the extent that he 
survives in a society where laws control everything 
and give contradictory orders. All (non-coercive) 
human action committed in defiance of the State 
constitutes the Counter-Economy. (For ease of later 
analysis, we exclude murder and theft, which 
are done with the disapproval of the State. Since 
taxation and war encompass nearly all cases of 
theft and murder, the few independent acts really 
should be classified as other forms of statism.) 
Since anything the State does not licence or ap- 
prove of is forbidden or prohibited, there are no 
third possibilities. 

A Counter-Economist is (1) anyone practicing 
a counter-economic act; (2) one who studies such 
acts. Counter-Economics is the (1) practice (2) 
study of counter-economic acts. 



The Size of the Counter-Economy 



T 



^he Counter-Economy is vast. Our brief study 
of economics tells us that this should be no 
surprise. The more controls and taxation a State 
imposes on its people, the more they will evade 
and defy them. Since the United States is one of 
the less (officially) controlled countries, and the 
Counter- Economy here is fairly large, the global 
Counter-Economy should be expected to be even 
larger — and it is. 

U.S. government estimates of the size of just 
the tax-dodging part of the Counter-Economy 
is twenty to forty million of the population. The 



40 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Western European Counter-Economy is larger; in 
Italy, much of the civil service sits in government 
offices during the early part of the day and then 
moonlights at private jobs and business in the 
afternoon and evening. 

Communism collapsed in no small part due to 
the Counter-Economy. Nearly everything was 
available in the Counter-Economy with only 
shoddy goods and shortages in the official social- 
ist economy. The Soviets called Counter-Economic 
goods "left-hand" or nalevo and entire manufac- 
turing assembly lines co-existed nalevo with the 
desultory State industry ones, on the same factory 
floor. Counter- Economic "capitalists" sold shares 
in their companies and vacationed in Black Sea 
resorts. Managers of collective farms who needed 
a tractor replaced in a hurry look to the Counter- 
Economy rather than see their kolkhoz collapse 
awaiting a State tractor delivery. Currently, the 
Russian government seeks to reestablish State 
control of the economy by granting monopolies 
to cronies and imprisoning recalcitrant corporate 
executives. As with Communism, this flirtation with 
Fascism is just as doomed to failure. 

Nothing works in "right-hand" communism; 
everything works in the left-hand free market. 

From "black" market apartments in the Neth- 
erlands to "black" housing in Argentina, the 
Counter- Economy is well known to the people 
of the world as the place to get things otherwise 
unobtainable — or keep things one has earned. 
Inflation breeds flight from fiat money; exchange 



41 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

controls have created dual exchange rates in 
nearly every country on the globe. Whatever the 
number of local currency units a tourist can get 
for his dollars at the official exchange rate, he or 
she can get more on the black market. 

Smuggling is so commonplace that nearly all 
tourists slip purchases past customs agents with- 
out thinking. Perhaps 20%-30% of Americans fail 
to report taxable income (actually nearly 100% fail 
to report at least some); but, in Latin American 
countries, close to 80% goes uncollected and the 
State supports itself by ever-greater inflation of 
the fiat money supply. 

The border between Hong Kong and Communist 
China and even the ocean straits between Taiwan 
and the mainland bustle with illegal trade. West- 
ern DVDs and jeans were once illegally available 
in most provinces of China — now they're manu- 
facturing them there! 

Saigon, renamed Ho Chi Minh City, remains 
the black market center of Vietnam. Even more 
telling, it produces most of the goods and services 
of all Vietnam. Myanmar's (Burma's) rigidly con- 
trolled official economy, according to the Manches- 
ter Guardian, is nothing but paper and the entire 
market has gone black. 

Under the noses of American forces, Afghani tribes 
grow, process, and ship heroin by the metric tonne. 

Tax evasion, inflation avoidance, smuggling, 
free production, and illegal distribution still com- 
pose only half the Counter- Economy. Labor flows 
as freely as capital, as hordes of "illegal aliens" 



42 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

pour across borders from more-statist to less- 
statist economic regions. 

Consciousness-altering substances and even 
unproven medicines such as dichloroacetate and 
Laetrile make up a well-known but small frac- 
tion of the Counter- Economy. Drugs are grown 
on huge plantations, refined in scores of factories 
and laboratories, distributed by fleets of boats, 
planes, trucks and cars, and sold to customers by 
regiments of wholesalers and armies of street dealers. 

The State's imposition of some people's moral 
codes on others leads to Bible smuggling in atheist 
States and pornography publishing in conserva- 
tive religious States. The "world's oldest profes- 
sion," as sexual prostitution has been titled, is 
also — if that title is true — the world's oldest 
counter-economic industry. 

Feminists seeking control of their own bodies 
look to the Counter-Economy to obtain contracep- 
tives and find midwives to deliver babies their way 
in the Counter- Economy. 

Nobody works at anything anywhere which is 
not connected with Counter-Economics. Those 
looking for a more exhaustive listing of counter- 
economic activities, with all the sources and refer- 
ences footnoted, are invited to read the author's 
upcoming book Counter -Economics . 

Information 

r If ^ wo Counter- Economic industries are singled 



out for their importance to agorism. Justice 




43 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

is a commodity; its manner of distribution defines 
a social system and will be covered in detail in 
Chapter Seven. 

The other business is Information. The Internet 
explosion has led the American State — for now, 
at any rate — to throw up its tentacles at regula- 
tion of the Information industry. Every legisla- 
tive session, however, brings new attempts to tax 
and control the World Wide Web. But consider 
this well: should the Counter-Economy lick the 
information problem, it would virtually eliminate 
the risk it incurs under the State's threat. That 
is, if you can advertise your products, reach your 
consumers and accept payment (a form of infor- 
mation), all outside the detection capabilities of 
the State, what enforcement of control would be left? 

At the leading edge of Web development today 
is encryption. Advanced researchers have devel- 
oped methods of "locking away" data in memory 
banks that defy any "breaking in." That is, the 
State cannot reach the invoices, inventory lists, 
accounts and so on of the Counter-Economist. An 
area of human society immune to the power of the 
State deserves the name — if anything does — of 
Anarchy. The State, though, continues to attempt 
to penetrate privacy with quantum computing 
methods of cracking even the most complex cryp- 
tographic schemes. Will the Counter-Economy 
respond with quantum cryptography? Stay tuned 
— the race is hardly at an end. 

This leads us to two crucial questions: what 
happens if the State is abolished and we have a 



44 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

free market and why has the Counter- Economy 
not overwhelmed the existing economy already? 
These questions bring us back to the land of theory 
where libertarianism answers the first question 
and agorism the second. 

Before we deal with them, let us consider some 
applications of counter-economic business prac- 
tices and social interactions, which will both il- 
lustrate our descriptions and possibly be of some 
profit to you and yours. 



45 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Four 
Applied 
Counter-Economics 



ounter- Economics is application. 



People have discovered and acted in 



^w/a Counter-Economic way without un- 
derstanding what they are doing, why they are 
doing it, and even denying that they are doing 
it at all. 

Understanding what you are doing usually 
helps, and applying Counter-Economics system- 
atically and consistently maximizes both your 
profit and freedom. As it turns out, the basic 
formula is no more difficult than simple account- 
ing arithmetic used in all business. 

The basic law of Counter-Economics is to trade 
risk for profit. Having done so, one naturally 
(acting to remove felt unease) attempts to reduce 
the risks. If you reduce your risks while others 
continue to face the higher risks, you naturally 
out-compete and survive longer. And you profit. 




46 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



What's The Risk? 



It is possible to make a reasonable estimate of 
the risks you are taking in Counter- Economic 
activity, which is better precision than many busi- 
ness ventures offer. The government itself gathers 
statistics concerning apprehension of "criminals." 
And publishes them. The police agencies brag about 
how few cases are solved and how fast the "crime 
rate" is growing to justify ever-bigger budgets. 

Nonetheless, most "crimes" go completely unre- 
ported and undetected, so the State's stats are an 
upper limit of apprehension. That is, their figures 
are useful as maximum risk. The highest appre- 
hension rate for the most foul crimes seldom hit 
20%, an indication of government effectiveness in 
maintaining public order. 



uppose you wish to do something Counter-Eco- 



O'nomic. To be specific, you can buy something 
for $10,000 and sell it for $20,000. Your regular 
overhead is $5000. Your net return on investment 
is $5000 (on an investment of $15,000 that's 33%, 
extremely high) but, since there is a risk, how can 
you tell if the return is worth it? 

Let's say the government claims it catches 20% 
of those doing what you want to do. If you are 
caught, the penalty would be a (maximum) fine 
of $50,000 or six months in jail. Your "downside" 
risk, then, is 20% of $50,000 or $10,000. In this 



Is It Worth It? 




47 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

example, it would not be worth it: to gain $5000 
but risk losing $10,000. 

If the apprehension rate were 10% and the fine 
$25,000, then your risk would be $2500 for a gain 
of $5000. As is obvious, you could get caught one 
time in ten, pay off your fines, and still come out 
way ahead. Of course, all these calculations make 
certain assumptions about your subjective values. 
You may fear risk to a pathological state and any 
risk is too much. Or you may love frustrating the 
State and take high risks for lower gain just for 
the fun of it. 

Actually, a more realistic risk estimate would in- 
clude the price of a lawyer to beat your charges and 
the probability of being convicted after apprehension. 

Assume that the retainer to your lawyer raises 
your overhead $1000 per transaction. Now your 
payoff is $4000, but the conviction rate (with plea 
bargaining and court delays) is only 20%. (Again, 
that is high in many jurisdictions; many cases are 
dropped long before they come to trial.) 

Now your risk, using our first figures, is 20% of 
20% of $50,000, or $2000. With a payoff of $4000, 
a loss of $2000 would deter few entrepreneurs. 
If you would like a simple formula for your own 
business, try this: 

Counter-Economic Payoff = profit minus loss = 
(Promised price) minus (cost minus overhead) minus 
((Penalty or Fine) x (probability of arrest) x (probability of conviction)) 

If positive, go. If negative, don't go. 



48 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Lowering Risks 



T 



taking reasonable steps to conceal your activi- 
ties from accidental discovery, learning to talk 
only to trusted friends, spotting poor risks or gov- 
ernment agents all reduce your risk and increase 
your payoff. As you develop techniques to lower 
your risk, you will increase your counter-economic 
activities. More of them become profitable. 
These side effects include the creation of an agorist 
society. More on that in Chapter Seven. 



Counter-Economizing 

hile it's true that you cannot obey all the 
inconsistent laws of the State and so be 
completely "white market," you can live completely 
Counter- Economically and be completely "black 
market." 

In the middle 1970s, the federal State passed 
a regulation imposing a maximum speed limit 
on U.S. highways of 55 mph. With the threat of 
cutting federal funds to states and counties, the 
entire driving population decelerated to a creeping 
crawl. Or did it? 

Consider the following calculation: at 55 mph a 
trucker can drive 55 miles in an hour, 550 miles in 
ten hours and 2200 miles in 40 hours. At an aver- 
age of 70 mph, he makes 700 miles in ten hours 
and 2800 miles in 40 hours. 

To make it even clearer, assume that the trucker 
nets $1000, after costs, for each 600 mile run. 




49 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

He makes four runs legally for $4000 in an easy 
week, or $5000 by extending his hours or work- 
ing weekends. At 70 mph he makes $5000 for the 
(roughly) 40 hour week. 

With that type of incentive, the race went to 
the swift and the "double nickel" speed limit was 
scofflawed. But being caught and fined could wipe 
out that advantage. Suppose fuel were consumed 
at a rate that cost an extra $200 at the higher 
speed, and you received an average fine of $200. 
Four busts a week and it's no longer worth it. 

Along came Citizen's Band Radio. Put $200 or 
$400 once into a CB radio investment, reduce your 
busts to once a week, and you're back in business. 
And that, of course, is what happened. Truckers 
"spotted" for each other, formed convoys, and 
thwarted the State's "Smokey Bear" highwaymen. 

Consider the side effects: 

• Truckers found "solidarity" economically, cul- 
turally, and anti-politically 

• A CB culture exploded into the popular culture 
with C. W. McCall's classic song "Convoy" 

• Non-truckers who were willing to buy a CB 
and learn the culture (especially the language) 
were accepted freely into the ordered highway an- 
archy. More evasion of regulations followed and the 
Counter- Economy grew 

• Truckers, many of conservative upbringing, 
became considerably more tolerant and willing to 
help other "lawbreakers" when their common enemy, 
Smokey, threatened. 



50 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

The CB explosion is not meant here to be a 
model, in the sense of waiting around for the State 
to trigger off mass rebellion by an egregiously 
stupid law. This happened to be a particularly 
spectacular case, but no more than the sudden 
jump in counter-economics when Prohibition was 
passed in the 1920s or when the draft led to two- 
year slavery, and possible death, in 1964. And the 
State does not learn from its mistakes, as recent 
efforts to reimpose the 55 mph limit as well as 
reactivate the draft arise again. 

Counter-Economizing Yourself 

hatever service you provide the market, you 
know best how to counter-economize. You 
know best which regulations to avoid first for 
maximum payoff-to-risk ratio. You know which 
suppliers can be trusted and which cannot. You 
know which customers to trust and which not to 
trust. Division of labor, subjective value, and hu- 
man individuality all contribute to making your 
case (and everyone else's) unique. 

If you seek or want advice on how best to coun- 
ter-economize, you need personal counseling (simi- 
lar to investment counseling). But, considering 
the hundreds of millions of people — many with 
educational and cultural handicaps — who coun- 
ter-economize quite successfully, the challenge is 
not that great. You need mostly the will to do it. 
(And that "Psychological Counter-Economics" will 
be important as part of Chapter Eight.) 




51 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

It's undoubtedly easier to extend your counter- 
economizing when everyone else is doing it. Most 
people are, but in small and different ways. 

Still, if you could win more suppliers and cus- 
tomers over to your trust and get them to counter- 
economize, they would not only resist turning you 
in but they would develop a tendency not to leak 
secrets and would, therefore, decrease your risk 
and increase your payoff both ways. 

This fact is the driving force toward expansion of 
the Counter- Economy. This force is what Agorism 
unleashes against the State. 



52 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Five 

LlBERTARIANISM 



T 



"^he basic premise of agorist thinking is that 
Counter-Economics has failed to free soci- 
ety because Counter-Economics lacks a 
moral structure that only a full-blown philosophi- 
cal system can provide. In this chapter, we deal 
with the other half of this problem: an ideology 
unconnected to reality. Where Counter-Economics 
is application without theory, Libertarianism is 
theory without application. 



Many Gods, One Morality 

Libertarianism differs from all other philoso- 
phies by its pluralism. It does not to ask how 
you came to the fundamental moral premise: re- 
ligious revelation, atheistic observation, natural 
law theory, or many others. Christians, Taoists, 
Objectivists, and Pagans travel different routes 
to arrive at one moral code in common: initiation 
of coercion, or the threat of violence, is immoral. 
This is the libertarian principle. 

Two things follow from the phrasing: (1) there 
are no exceptions, hence libertarianism affects all 



53 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

human action by this formulation; (2) it is phrased 
negatively , so that anything else is permissible 
human behavior, though each adherent may find 
other acts immoral or objectionable. 

Christianity yields a yes-no answer to every 
aspect of human activity; so, too, Marxism, Islam, 
Objectivism, and many, many other understand- 
ings of the world's nature. In these systems, any- 
thing not prohibited is mandatory. You must or 
you must not. Libertarianism answers only that 
you may or you may not, leaving choice to you. 

Any religion or ideology that swears not to co- 
erce others to act in accordance with its precepts 
is compatible with libertarianism. All religions 
and ideologies that use force for anything save 
self-defence (in the narrow, immediate sense, 
excluding "preventive aggression" and other such 
rationalizations) are enemies of libertarianism. 



Libertarian Society 

Libertarianism's very pluralism prevents one 
from ascribing any unanimous characteristic 
to Libertarians. They all want Liberty, but for dif- 
ferent reasons, and see different ways of achieving 
it. Some would take control of the State and "force 
people to be free," others would not even resort to 
violence to defend themselves. Giving all those 
groups their due for enriching Libertarian thought 
and life with greater variety than any other ide- 
ology, the rigorous application of consistency (to 



54 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

which agorists and this book adhere) does settle 
some issues. 

A free society is one in which Man is constrained 
only by unthinking Nature. His fellow men leave 
him alone. One can personally live up to this and 
one can admit only those who uphold it, expelling 
all those who don't. But one cannot prevent anyone 
from instituting aggression, one can only deal with 
it after the fact. 

Statists advocate creating a bigger criminal, a 
great monster institution which will terrify nearly 
everyone, innocent or guilty, into submission. This 
organization will extract some form of acceptance 
from its "citizens" and yet plunder them at will 
(taxation). It will control their behavior and even 
their thinking, though some statists seek to place 
some restraints upon this super-criminal organi- 
zation. Some of those who advocate the strongest 
restraints (as they perceive them) call themselves 
"limited government libertarians." Since they seek 
a small state or "mini" -archy, they are minarchists. 

Consistent libertarians see no place for crimi- 
nals, even to fight other criminals. They believe 
free-market (all-voluntary) methods will take care 
of the few criminals; finding them (investigation), 
arresting them (delegated protection), trying them 
(arbitration), and restoring lost value to the victim 
from the aggressors (restitution). The means of 
accomplishing this vary from communal power to 
highly technological, competitive business agen- 
cies and others in between, such as neighborhood 
block associations. Such "no- government libertar- 



55 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

ians" are called anarchists. The peaceful libertar- 
ians who refuse even to defend themselves have 
to be classified with anarchists. 

It is bitterly ironic that heavy State propaganda 
has convinced many people that anarchists throw 
bombs, since most anti-war movements, draft re- 
sistance, disarmament, and tax resistance groups 
were organized by anarchists of one sort or an- 
other. Perhaps 0.01 % of those calling themselves 
anarchists throughout history have used a bomb; 
100% of all States bomb, shell, and machine-gun 
regularly as a matter of course. 

A Libertarian society is one which approximates 
a free society save for a small percentage of crimi- 
nal aggression, which is handled by voluntary 
mechanisms. A society in which aggression gets 
"out of hand" is one with a ole facto, if not ole jure, 
State or government: a statist society. 

Libertarianism and the Free Market 

A few libertarians advocate communal or 
neighborhood social organization with col- 
lectively held "property" voluntarily surrendered. 
Most libertarians have adopted the free market 
and the economic understanding of it developed 
in Chapter One. So whenever a conflict between the 
Economics of government intervention or confiscation 
(statism, for short) and free enterprise emerges in 
public debate, Libertarians rush to the forefront 
of defence of the individual or non-state group. 



56 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Libertarianism often confuses statists of the Left 
wing and the Right by opposing both. Libertarians 
see war as total "socialism" and march with many 
Leftists against it. Yet opposition to welfare stat- 
ism allies Libertarianism with some Rightists. 

But Statists of the Left and Right are easily distin- 
guishable from libertarians in any coalition: threaten 
the State's existence and observe their reaction. 

Conservatives will give up free enterprise rather 
than see government abolished; liberals will go 
to war rather than see government abolished. 
Libertarians will abolish the State and end both 
socialism and war. 

Libertarianism and the 
Counter-Economy 

Libertarian dissidents, from Polish professors 
to American students, make up an intellec- 
tual field of Counter-Economics. A Yugoslavian 
theorist, raised in the Marxist tradition, called for 
removing politics from Socialism and embracing 
a market economy. 

It would appear that there is a natural affin- 
ity between the philosophers of freedom and the 
practitioners of Counter-Economics. Indeed, few 
libertarians would deny the moral correctness of 
the latter. An early slogan some radical libertar- 
ians put on a button was "Defend The Black Mar- 
ket." Libertarianism in the United States traces 
its history from the Abolitionist movement to free 



57 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

the slaves, an act of human counter-economics. 

And yet, while many abolitionists created and 
maintained an Underground Railway to assist 
slaves who freed themselves counter-economically, 
others called for upholding the law, working 
within the system and engaging in politics to take 
over the government and pass laws to free slaves. 
The same division between activists and reform- 
ers afflicts modern libertarians — and many other 
ideological movements, to be sure. 

George Orwell, who came to a type of libertarian- 
ism from activism in the Socialist movement of the 
1930s, castigated some of his fellow socialists for 
refusing to dirty their hands in actually fighting 
for their beliefs on the battlefields of Spain. This 
perceptive author of 1 984 and Animal Farm noted 
these hypocritical dilettantes' proclivity for hang- 
ing around English drawing rooms and waxing 
eloquent for the socialist cause while contributing 
precious little else. He called them "Parlor Pinks." 

Libertarianism is afflicted with more than its 
share of "Library Libs" today. Some, though, are 
horribly paralyzed by the question, "How do we 
achieve a free society?" 

This combination of strategic paralysis, moral 
lassitude, honest confusion due to the rich variety 
of libertarian pluralism, and not a little "selling 
out", has weakened libertarianism to the point 
where what is presently called the "Libertarian 
Movement" may no longer be trusted to defend the 
Counter-Economy and achieve a libertarian society. 

The next chapter shows why. 



58 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Six 
Applied Libertarianism 



T 



A Brief History of Liberty 

Y "If ^he history of the Libertarian movement can 
be divided into four historical periods. The 
first covered most of our history, when 
many men and women derived the ideas of free- 
dom and defended freedom as they understood 
it with little comprehension of the mechanics of 
human action. Some of these, such as the Quak- 
ers of Pennsylvania, settled colonies away from 
predatory statism and developed peace and trade 
with the natives. 

The American Revolution erupted the year that 
Adam Smith published the first basic work on 
economics. Still, the confused American Revolu- 
tionaries allowed the Federalist statists to restore 
a strong central government by a bit of trickery 
called the "Constitution," a piece of paper which 
supposedly guaranteed to restrain the new State. 
Most of the Revolutionaries — nearly all the 
signers of the Declaration of Independence, for 
instance — opposed the Constitution. Many Amer- 



59 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

icans were taken in by the statist selling job and 
laid down their arms that were defending them, 
practically in exchange for the paper guarantee. 

As soon as the new government was elected, 
it sent the military to Pennsylvania to crush the 
tax-rebels who opposed the new tax on whiskey 
distillation. 

In England, soon after, a man named William 
Godwin took the political ideas of the American 
Revolutionaries to their logical conclusion and 
became the first anarchist. In the 1830s European 
intellectual scene, a man named Max Stirner com- 
bined anarchy with defence of the free market (as 
far as Adam Smith understood it then) and created 
a philosophy of egoism or total individualism. For 
a time, he contested with Marx and Engels for 
the loyalty of the Young Hegelians in the German 
clubs. They wrote a two-volume defense of their 
theory against Stirner (The German Ideology). 

In the United States, Josiah Warren continued 
the anarchist tradition in Massachusetts. One 
of his abolitionist followers, Lysander Spooner, 
finally developed the killing argument against the 
U.S. State in his remarkable natural law treatise, 
No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority. 
Alas, it was nearly a century late because the 
State was entrenched well enough to fight a civil 
war to destroy the remaining internal restraints 
on its power — naturally, under the pretext of 
expanding freedom by abolishing slavery. 

Spooner saw through that smokescreen and 
supported both abolition and secession of the 



60 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Southern States. His follower, Benjamin Tucker, 
discovered Stirner's European individualism 
and combined the two traditions. The heyday of 
Individualist Anarchism, during the publication 
of Tucker's Liberty magazine, from 1881 to 1908, 
could be called the second stage of Libertarianism. 
George Bernard Shaw, for example, broke into the 
American literary scene through Liberty. (The full 
title of Tucker's journal was Liberty: the Mother, 
Not the Daughter, of Order) 

Tucker still had problems with economics, not 
understanding subjective value or the validity of 
rent, interest, and profit. While willing to accept 
anything arrived at freely, he and his associates 
spent their energies on side issues and invalid 
controversies. When World War I broke out, they 
lost the center stage of history to the socialists for 
half a century. 

At the same time that Tucker himself was giv- 
ing up, brilliant Austrian economist Ludwig Von 
Mises wrote his doctoral thesis (1910), The Theory 
of Money and Credit, which explained interest, 
inflation, and business cycles. His analysis led to 
an easy explanation (and prediction) of the Great 
Depression, but it went unheeded. In 1949, Mises 
published his magnum opus, Human Action. Along 
the way, he sent the Communist Economists into 
a panic by proving that economic calculation was 
impossible once socialist statists destroyed the 
free-market pricing system. 

During the 1920s and 1930s, proto-libertarians 
such as H.L. Mencken and Albert J. Nock kept 



61 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

the philosophy alive but in despair. One of Nock's 
students, Frank Chodorov, reached one of Mises's 
students, Murray Rothbard. In 1950, Rothbard 
connected with the American anarchist tradition 
and the modern libertarian stage began. 

Another of Nock's students, Suzanne LaFollette, 
inspired many modern libertarian feminists. More 
women — Rose Wilder Lane and Isabel Patterson 
— kept libertarianism alive in the 1940s. 

For twenty years, Rothbard tirelessly sold his 
consistent libertarian view in intellectual circles 
and was purged from the Right, from Objectivists, 
from the Left, and various other groups, always 
taking a few more with him, never despairing. In 
1969, during the heat of the student revolt against 
the Vietnam War and the draft, both the leftist 
Students for a Democratic Society and the rightist 
Young Americans for Freedom split internally. The 
anarchists from SDS joined the free marketeers 
from YAF at a convention called by Dr. Rothbard, 
and thousands of young activists were unleashed 
onto the campuses to fight for pure freedom. 

Within a few years, there were a million Liber- 
tarians in North America and small groups from 
England to Spain to Australia. Libertarians gradu- 
ated and started businesses or entered the higher 
levels of academy, bringing reinforcements to Dr. 
Rothbard and his previously small corps. Liber- 
tarian reporters, authors, and even newscasters 
spread through the media. 

Robert LeFevre, another libertarian educator 
contemporary with Rothbard, graduated hundreds 



62 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

of businessmen from his seminars and thousands 
from Rampart College. Leonard Read and his crew 
reached many from all walks of life at the Foun- 
dation for Economic Education. New foundations 
and institutes sprang up. 

Early in 1971, a group of Calif ornians started a 
"Libertarian Party" as a front for distribution of 
literature and appeal for equal time on local me- 
dia. In December of 1971, David F. Nolan convened 
a founding convention of a Libertarian Party in 
deadly earnest. Rothbard scoffed at the idea of a 
party as wildly premature. 

In 1972, an LP presidential candidate got few 
votes, but, thanks to a renegade Republican elec- 
tor from Virginia, John Hospers, Professor of Phi- 
losophy at the University of Southern California, 
received one electoral vote. His running mate, 
Toni Nathan of Oregon, became the first woman to 
receive one. The elector, Roger MacBride, became 
the LP nominee for president in 1976. 

The LP emerged from two sources: impatience 
and inconsistency. In 1972, the student movement 
collapsed but the graduates needed years to affect 
society by working their way through the system 
and building alternatives outside it. This desire 
to achieve results now — get rich quick — was 
expressed in the return of many who had rejected 
the Statist system to re-enter it, though most of 
those entering the LP were not the politically 
cynical old-timers. 

The more raw recruits to libertarianism had lit- 
tle direct experience with politics and so accepted 



63 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

arguments that the party would spread the word 
to people used to receiving it via the biennial elec- 
toral process. While half the LP recruiters swore 
that the LP was an educational tool and would 
never win an election and take power, the other 
half promised the replacement of the Republicans 
by the new party and the transformation of society 
from the top down. 

During 1973, the party threat became serious 
and the libertarian movement began to split. The 
anti-party libertarians called themselves vari- 
ous names such as New Libertarians, Left (more 
consistently radical) Libertarians, Radical Liber- 
tarians, and exotic names such as Voluntaryists. 
The common goal of these activists was to deflect 
the Party anti-principle in the minds and hearts 
of most libertarians and pursue the original goals 
of Liberty in libertarian — that is, anti-political 
— ways. The Partyarchs (as those who professed 
being ruled by a party, yet called themselves an- 
archists, were then called) and their minarchist 
allies were small in number but did have an 
advantage in getting newspaper and television 
coverage. (Radical libertarian campaigns such as 
the 1976 "Vote For Nobody" CounterCampaign 
received publicity on several hundred radio sta- 
tions and 50% of registered American voters failed 
to cast ballots.) 

More and more "pure" libertarians gave up on 
the label as the word was increasingly identified 
with a group out to take political power — as 
opposed to abolishing it. The New Libertarians 



64 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

found that many who would agree to live freely 
and trade without aggression were repelled by the 
Libertarian name. 

Finally, in 1983, the Movement of the Libertar- 
ian Left, the New Libertarian Alliance, and others 
moved to drop the Libertarian label entirely. Some 
chose the name Voluntaryism. Those wishing to 
promote the completely consistent ideology de- 
scribed in this book chose the name agorist. 

During the 1973 struggle, the challenges for an 
alternative strategy to politics were answered by 
the NLA founder who discovered and coined the 
term Counter-Economics (see Chapter Three). 
In 1980, the NLA published New Libertarian 
Manifesto, which explained agorism and beyond 
to libertarian activists. 

The Libertarian Failure 

Libertarians were and still are a pluralistic 
group. Different interpretations of Liberty 
and how to achieve it were cheerfully tolerated for 
the most part. The appearance of a "Party line" 
was anathema to this spirit of living variety. The 
burning issue shifted from "which new libertar- 
ian theory works and which does not?" to "which 
'Libertarian' candidate can get elected?" 

To many, Libertarianism was a fine theory 
which had no obvious practice. There are many 
paths to freedom (true) and each individual should 
choose the one he or she thought most workable. 
One that was chosen swallowed up the others. 



65 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

(How it did was simple: it tied into the State's 
grant of monopoly to ideologies that form a cen- 
tralized "political party" and then spokespersons 
of that ideology are automatically represented 
as servitors or functionaries of that party, even 
when they vigorously deny any connection, by the 
statist media.) 

And, then again, maybe not. "Libertarian" may 
have come to mean "LP member" but agorists, 
Voluntaryists, Left Libertarians, and such still 
outnumber the few thousand LP members and 
even the never-since-matched million votes their 
candidate, Edward Clark, received in the 1980 
U.S. presidential race. 

Whether or not libertarianism failed and died — 
perverted — so near to 1984 (Orwell's deadline for 
tyranny's triumph. . . in the form of an all-powerful 
party) or was simply a stage in the evolution of 
agorism, building a theory to explain and morally 
defend Counter- Economics, is a moot point. Both 
positions are, in a sense, true. Agorism is here and 
viable for those who wish to live as freely as pos- 
sible now and increase their freedom in the future. 
What now calls itself "Libertarian" cannot honestly 
offer that anymore. Those who understand this will 
reject the "Libertarian" Party and other political 
solutions to the statist problem; those who accept 
the LP will waste their time, energy and wealth in 
building a new means of keeping people in bondage 
under the thumb of the State. 



66 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



The Libertarian Insight and Fallacy 

Libertarian theory provided the crucial insight 
as to why Counter-Economics was morally 
correct as well as (obviously) practical and very 
profitable. The crucial issue was that of the State, 
its nature, and its evolution. 

The easiest paradigm (short model) for the origin 
of the State was offered by Franz Oppen-heimer, 
a German sociologist, and adapted into American 
libertarianism in Albert J. Nock's 1935 book, Our 
Enemy, The State. All historical examples fit this 
simple paradigm: 

When most of humanity settled into peace- 
ful farming communities, with perhaps larger 
marketplaces (remember the original agora of 
Greece) in towns, some people discovered a means 
of surviving parasitically from the productivity of 
others. They formed robber bands and attacked 
towns and settlements, plundering, raping, and 
murdering. Probably the original barbarian hordes 
were hunters who took to hunting man when their 
game died out rather than taking to farming, trad- 
ing, or productive manufacture. 

These roving groups were a small minority (or 
their victims would have died out and they as 
well) but large as compared to a single town or 
village. Somewhere along the way, one of them 
discovered that they could allow the peasants to 
live with enough to survive on and come back at 
the next harvest for another raid. 



67 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Then these raiders had another idea: they would 
stay in the same towns, steal lightly but regularly, 
murder enough to keep the peasants and mer- 
chants in line, and live well. Other areas, seeing 
these petty kingdoms arise, decided to submit 
themselves to their own home-grown warlords 
so that they would not fall prey to foreign war- 
riors. (The Book of Samuel in the Old Testament 
describes the anarchist prophet Samuel trying to 
convince the Israelites that they didn't really want 
a king but finally giving in to them.) 

Parasites must remain a minority or kill their 
hosts. So they discovered religion (and later ideol- 
ogy) as a means to intimidate peasants and win 
the all-important sanction of the victim (an apt 
phrase of Ayn Rand's). Brutal thugs became "kings 
by divine right" and some very powerful statists 
called Emperors, Pharaohs, or Tsars were said to 
be divine, the unstoppable choice of gods. 

And so these barbarian raiders institutional- 
ized plunder (taxation), murder (execution and 
warfare), and even rape (droit de seigneur, for 
example). They took control of roads to plunder 
the caravans (tolls, tariffs), they suppressed all 
rival criminal gangs with their own (police), and 
established their own churches, schools, judges, 
and even philosophers, minstrels, and artists to 
work in their royal courts. 

Thus was born the State. 

As people come to understand this situation, 
and especially important questions of conscience 
split religions and ideologies, dissidence grew. 



68 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

The State learned to survive by adapting. It used 
its Court thinkers (intellectuals) to come up with 
new ways of mystifying the people. 

The kings "limited" themselves and shared 
their plunder with aristocrats and certain favored 
merchants. Thus was born mercantilism (which 
Adam Smith challenged). Then even peasants and 
workers were permitted to plunder their fellow 
merchants, farmers, and workers. This was called 
Democracy. Groups were allowed to organize to 
fight over who should steal from whom (though 
an elite of bureaucrats and very rich businessmen 
continue, no matter who is elected) and thus were 
formed political parties. 

The libertarian analysis superbly explained the 
political history of the world and — combined with 
free-market economics — analyzed depressions, 
modern warfare, and revolutions, describing their 
causes and predicting the futility of political solutions. 

When Libertarianism began to organize itself, 
though, much of the movement was bought off 
with yet another political party. 

To understand the Libertarian fallacy, consider 
its insight in other terms. Oppenheimer and Nock 
pointed out that there were only two ways to ac- 
quire wealth (food, shelter, tools, entertainment). 
One could produce some and trade for others — or 
one could steal those produced. Those are all the 
choices there are. They named the productive way, 
the economic means, and the parasitic way, the 
political means. 



69 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Murray Rothbard, following Ludwig Von Mises's 
Human Action with his own economic treatise Man, 
Economy and State, added that insight onto Aus- 
trian economics in the final chapters. The demand 
for elucidation was so great that he wrote, in detail, 
an entire book on the subject: Power and Market. 

It is amazing that, for a time, even Dr. Rothbard 
forgot his own lesson. The choice was power/poli- 
tics vs. market/economics. Using political means 
to achieve free-market ends is self- destructive and 
self-defeating. 

The recognition of the Libertarian incompat- 
ibility of statist means to anti-statist ends was 
the first agorist insight. Following that, the new 
agorists looked for the proper means to achieve a 
free society or at least a fully libertarian society. 
They sought market means only. 

The author of this book and his companions 
found the Counter- Economy "staring them in the 
face" as soon as they thought of looking. 



70 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Seven 
Agorism 



T 



"^o understand agorism fully and to compare 
it to competing ways of thinking, one needs 
to know two things about it: its goal and 
its path to that goal. This knowledge is critical 
to evaluating all ideologies. The goal is living in 
the agora and the path is expanding Counter-Eco- 
nomics. Remember our constant, if not nagging, 
emphasis on consistency, both internally and with 
reality. Agorism must have a path consistent with 
its goal and a goal consistent with its path. 



The Axioms of Agorism 

A free society is the goal of many people, not 
all of them agorists or even libertarians. Ago- 
rists can see nothing but a free market in a free 
society; after all, who or what will prevent it? 

The First Axiom of Agorism: the closest 
approach to a free society is an uncorrupted 
agora (open marketplace). 

An axiom is a principle or premise of a way of 
thinking. It is arrived at by insight, induction, and 
observation of nature. Theorems are arrived at 



71 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

deductively from axioms. A "zeroeth" axiom of 
agorism might be "there are no contradictions 
in reality and theory must be consistent with 
reality." Commonly known axioms in philosophy 
are "existence exists" and "A is A." Well-known math- 
ematical axioms are "things equal to another thing 
are equal to each other" and "a statement leading to 
a contradiction with a theorem or axiom is false." 

The first six chapters of this "primer" preceded 
the actual presentation of agorism to give you, 
the reader, enough understanding of economics, 
Counter-Economics, and libertarianism to see 
from where the insights that produced agorism 
were derived. They were not chosen arbitrarily 
but rather as a result of years of bitter experience 
and, in some cases, furious battles and acts of 
resistance. The "hard core" agorists had to have 
something worth dying for, and, far more impor- 
tant, worth living for. 

The Second Axiom of Agorism: the agora self- 
corrects for small perturbations of corruption. 

This axiom leads us to a far more detailed pic- 
ture of what our nearly free society would look 
like. It means simply that free-market entities will 
defend the free market. People have to choose to do 
it, of course, but the incentive (offering of subjec- 
tive-value satisfaction) will be present to motivate 
them to do so and will be sufficient to motivate 
enough people to do so. Occasional criminals will 
be discovered, sought, found, apprehended, tried, 
sentenced, compelled to deliver restitution, and (if 
possible) deterred from further actions. 



72 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

The Third Axiom of Agorism: the moral 
system of any agora is compatible with pure 
libertarianism. 

This axiom means that life and property are safe 
from all those who act morally in this society. We 
will describe this in the next section. But let us 
complete the axioms first. 

The Fourth Axiom of Agorism: agora in 
part is agora in whole; to a workable approxi- 
mation, the corruption of an agora raises 
protection costs and risks. 

This axiom's use will become blindingly clear 
when we deal with the path. 

Agorism has more theory, but it is derived from 
these axioms. For the professional logicians trip- 
ping across the theory for the first time, I need to 
add a fifth axiom for completion: agorism qua 
theory is an open system. This simply means 
that we may discover and add on other axioms, 
then check to see how consistent they are with 
what we already have. 

The Goal of Agora 

ith that short burst of hard philosophy in 
the last section, we are ready to picture the 
society we are aiming for. The goal of agorism is 
the agora. The society of the open marketplace as 
near to untainted by theft, assault, and fraud as 
can be humanly attained is as close to a free society 
as can be achieved. And a free society is the only 
one in which each and every one of us can satisfy 




73 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

his or her subjective values without crushing oth- 
ers' values by violence and coercion. 

It's a bit late to notice, perhaps, but if your 
highest values require murder and theft, you will 
not like the agora. Still, you have not wasted your 
time as you have just read an introduction to the 
thinking of your worst enemy. 

Science fiction has given us many convincing 
portrayals of future societies, from the grotesquely 
tyrannical (1984) to the transitional- to-freedom (The 
Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, Kings of the High Fron- 
tier) to actual free-market anarchies that acciden- 
tally arose (The Syndic, The Great Explosion, The 
Probability Broach). One even portrayed a likely 
scenario for an agorist revolution (Alongside Nighty 

Still, we cannot predict or foresee all the chang- 
es. Fortunately, we can get a good picture of an 
agorist society by picking out those changes (from 
our present statist societies) that must occur (or 
we simply don't have agorism). Our axioms give 
us that much. 

States will be gone. Roads will be run by com- 
peting market companies and kept in repair (for 
a change) to attract more customers. Then, again, 
cars may levitate over the roads for all we know 
or fly or take tunnels to preserve scenery. If you 
can think of one good reason to do something some 
way, in a free market it will be tried and many 
ways will work at the same time for different reasons. 

The post office will be gone and mail — if not 
replaced by e-mail entirely — will be efficiently 
and cheaply delivered ever-faster. 



74 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

War will be gone. "Defence budgets" will be gone. 
Taxes will be gone. You will pay for what you get only 
when you want it — unless what you want is a gift. 

I repeat, and cannot emphasize enough or wax 
floridly enough: the opportunities in freedom ex- 
plode into the unimaginable. The sheer complex- 
ity of all possible choice moves to the infinite as 
restrictions approach zero. 

Let us focus very narrowly on only one business 
in the totally free marketplace. 

Justice 

Justice is a business. It's not free; someone must 
pay for its workings. While Justice in the ab- 
stract is not an economic question (remember the 
wertfrei of Chapter One), the obtaining of justice 
is an economic service. 

Consider this illustration: Your completely 
tricked-out media center is stolen from your home. 
You notify Laissez Faire Insurance & Protection 
Company immediately. As fast as modern tech- 
nology permits, you receive an identical screen, 
receiver, game station, speakers, cables, and a 
sack full of remotes to replace the original, with 
downloads of any programs you missed in the in- 
terim. You have achieved full restoration of your 
subjective value to the condition it would have 
been had there been no act of aggression. Surely 
that is the goal of Justice. 

Now, how is this paid for in a free market, con- 
sistently with our understanding of economics and 



75 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

libertarian morality? The moral position first: you 
delegate LFI&PCo as your agent to use defensive 
force to regain your missing property and all ex- 
penses incurred. (If LFI&PCo attempt to extract 
more from the ultimately caught thief, they're on 
their own. The thief's Insurance and Protection 
Company is entitled to defend the thief.) 

Costs are paid for in three ways. First, as insur- 
ance: a small number of criminals may elude even 
the highly efficient, super-technological, extremely 
competitive protection agencies of the agorist fu- 
ture. Insurance is simply sharing the risk of some- 
thing happening with all the others subscribing 
to LFI&PCo. As the odds of a thief "getting away 
with it" approach zero, your premium approaches 
zero. Second, as protection: you install locks and 
detectors, alarms, and maybe even booby traps. 
Actually, since your premiums will go down as 
you make yourself aggression-proof, protection 
will incur minimal additional costs. Third, as 
restitution: the aggressor, when apprehended, 
pays LFI&PCo (1) the cost of replacement of the 
purloined or damaged goods; (2) interest for the 
time the goods were stolen; (3) any costs related 
to apprehension, including fees for investigators, 
arresting agents, arbitrators (market judges), and, 
if still necessary, enforcers' charges to reclaim 
your property. 

Note all the differences between statism and 
agorism. First, in a State, you can expect nothing 
from the police if you report a criminal. Maybe, 
some day, you'll get your property back if the 



76 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

criminal is ever caught and when they're through 
using the components as evidence. Since the odds 
of police accomplishing this are less than 10%, 
your insurance premiums (if the government still 
allows insurance companies) reflect the sharing of 
the high risk of theft plus whatever taxes the State 
tacks on plus the inefficiencies and additional 
costs of government regulation of the insurance 
industry. Did you ever try to collect insurance? 
Notice the form-filling and red tape — just like 
any other government bureaucracy imposed on a 
supposedly free enterprise? 

Second, in a State, you are under the control of 
the State in a criminal proceeding — even though 
you are the victim! You will be told when to ap- 
pear, where to go, and you will be forced to see 
the case through even if you change your mind. 
In the agora, should the matter go to arbitration, 
you will be required to report your loss since you 
want it replaced. That's all. The theft may even 
have been recorded on video, but even if not, the 
protection company's detectives do all the work. 
You stand back (or go about your business) and let 
them do their jobs. That's all. You may never be 
called again even if the thief is caught, convicted, 
and compelled to provide restitution. If LFI&PCo 
needs more testimony from you, they will ask you 
to attend the arbitration and, if they err, they 
will pay for the error. Should they need you inor- 
dinately, they will pay you for your trouble — or 
they will let you go and lose the case if you want 
too much for your time. 



77 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Third, in a State everything is monopolized; 
your appeal is to another judge who works for the 
State, too. In the agora, competition and choice is 
everywhere. There are plenty of insurance and 
protection companies from which to choose, all 
eager for your business. They can choose from a 
number of crack detectives, all competing to show 
that they are the best investigators. Should the 
matter go to arbitration, a number of arbitrators 
are competing for the positions, hoping to prove 
themselves the fairest and most worthy of your 
company's hire. 

Furthermore, if crime risks go up in your neigh- 
borhood, it is in the interest of your protection 
company (and those companies of your neighbors) 
to hire protectors (or guards) to patrol your area. 
Unless you attack your neighbor, their protectors 
will never threaten you. 

Fourth, in a State, your police protection is just 
as likely to arrest you for some crime that has no 
victim. There are no such victimless "crimes" in 
the agora. 

Fifth, the rights of the victim (you) can never 
be overridden by the rights of the real criminal. 
Under agorist justice, the arbitrator rules on 
the evidence that you are, or are not, entitled to 
restitution of goods (or even parts of the body, as 
technology makes that possible), interest for time 
lost, and your protection agency's expenses, includ- 
ing detection and apprehension costs. The moment 
the line is crossed into extracting more from the 
media-center thief than full restoration of your 



78 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

components and all costs incurred, you or your 
company become the aggressor and the ex-thief s 
protection agency will now honor its contract to 
defend him. (All insurance and protection con- 
tracts in an agorist society will stipulate that you 
cannot be protected from restoration proceedings 
after the protection company has defended you up 
to a fair arbitration. This ideal, seldom lived up to 
by States, is called "due process.") 

The difference between agorist protection and 
State policing has many more characteristics but 
this list gives you a good idea. There is nothing 
the State can offer you in moral protection that 
the market cannot offer; and the free market will 
function faster and better than the State. It's 
true that an occasional market company may be 
unsound, but you will always have the option of 
switching to a better competitor. Under a State, 
you know your protection service will always be 
the same — poor with no alternative. 

The State offers one thing the free market can- 
not and will not offer: aggression. If you wish to 
attack your immediate neighbors, you'll need State 
police to attack them for the crimes of belonging 
to the "wrong" religious group or of taking the 
"wrong" intoxicant or of performing sex in a way 
of which you disapprove. And, of course, your 
neighbors will need State police to attack you for 
similar "reasons." If you want to attack faraway 
neighbors, you need a State army. 

Or maybe you want to live in peace and freedom 
and will be satisfied with protection and defence. 



79 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Two Words or So 
About National Defence 

"TT^ull agorism obviously needs no "national de- 



fence." There are no nations to defend and no 
nations from which to be defended. Local protec- 
tion against occasional criminals is sufficient. 

Once in a while, criminals might band together 
to overwhelm a single protection company. Then 
the agorist protection agency merely needs to hire 
another protection company to assist it. 

Similarly, should one protection company "go 
bad," a few of the hundreds of others would be 
enough to apprehend its agents and shut it down. 
But, in fact, market forces would sap such a com- 
pany's destructive power long before it came to 
that. People raised in an agorist society would 
stop paying its insurance premiums and shift to its 
competitors. Detective and investigation agencies 
would terminate their contracts with it. Arbitra- 
tors would consistently rule against its aggressive 
moves. Agents working for the company would 
quit and go elsewhere. Secretaries and office help 
would walk out rather than have their reputations 
sullied by associating with such un-agorist types. 
Even restaurants and grocery stores would refuse 
to sell to the renegades or would hike their prices 
to show their additional loss of subjective value in 
dealing with such coercive filth. 




80 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Perhaps the company-turning- State would pay 
higher prices to hold on to their employees and 
supplies or replace them. But where would they 
get their money? They would lose customers the 
moment they started to act like a government. It 
is just as likely that they would collapse if they 
attempted to live by stealing (tax-collecting) since 
they would be compelled by force (of other compa- 
nies) to cease and desist their aggression against 
those companies' clients. 

People raised and educated to love an agorist 
society could not fall for taxpaying. And if they 
ever do, we will sink all the way down the road of 
corruption and oppression to the level of statism. . . 
that we "enjoy" today! 

The second word about territorial defence deals 
with the concerns of most people when they meet 
some version of anarchy — even the businesslike, 
efficient, free-market kind. How does the non-state 
defend itself against all the States still left? 

The glib answer is "let me count the ways." A 
few should suffice to allay nameless fears. 

First, the context must not be forgotten. Gov- 
ernment will not disappear until it is rejected by 
the overwhelming majority of the people under its 
rule. It is highly unlikely that other people, in oth- 
er countries around the world, will be unaffected 
should North America oust its State through this 
libertarian infection. A Libertarian International 
formed in 1980, had its first convention in Zurich 
in August, 1982, and continues into the 21st cen- 
tury as the International Society for Individual 



81 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Liberty (ISIL). Many of these members could be 
relied upon to act as fifth columnists in their home 
countries to stop their governments from attacking 
the obviously peaceful anarchy. 

Second, although we do not rule out "naked 
aggression," remember that wars are caused by 
both sides. There is an entire branch of libertar- 
ian theory we skipped in making this presenta- 
tion (actually, more than one) called Revisionist 
History, which rips the mask off government 
war propaganda to reveal the gleaming skull 
underneath. The United States, for example, has 
not been involved in a single war since the first 
Revolution that could not have been avoided nor 
one that would have cost American citizens their 
liberty had it been avoided (said liberty, to be 
sure, which they were already losing to their own 
government). Several volumes have been written 
about each of these wars, from Establishment and 
Revisionist perspectives, but, let me just list the 
bold, simple conclusions here and you can research 
for yourself whether I'm right. 

War of 1812 — US "Warhawks" sought a land 
grab in Canada. Pretext for the war: "impressment 
of American seamen" in ships running the British 
blockade of Napoleon. (True but trivial in com- 
parison to war and its cost in lives and freedom.) 

Mexican War — U.S. Southern interests 
sought land grab of Texas and other Mexican 
territories to form more "slave states" to balance 
off new Northern "free" states. Pretext: Mexico 



82 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

attacked Republic of Texas and thus U.S. sod. 
(Probably not; and Texas was not U.S. sod then.) 

War Between The States — North wished to 
enslave the South; South (justifiably) wished to 
be free of the North. Pretext: Abolition of slavery 
in South. (North kept slavery in Northern terri- 
tory; also, hard-core abolitionists supported both 
Southern secession and abolition of slavery as 
same issue of freedom.) 

Spanish-American War — U.S. interests 
grabbed Spanish colonies (Cuba, Philippines) for 
exploitation and turned the U.S. State into an 
old-world empire. Pretext: U.S. battleship Maine 
was "attacked" in a Cuban harbor. (Even though 
innocent, Spain apologized anyway and bent over 
backwards to avoid war.) 

World War I — U.S. interests, especially bank- 
ers, bet on Great Britain and moved U.S. in to 
save their investments when Russians pulled out 
leaving Germany one front. Pretext: German U- 
Boats attacked British ship carrying Americans; 
declaration of unrestricted submarine warfare 
zones by Germany. (Trivial relative to war, and 
U.S. ships should have "taken their chances" if 
they insisted on running huge risks for high profits 
by penetrating the blockades. GB was blockading 
Germany and other interests wanted to replay 
"War of 1812" and attack Britain.) 

World War II (Europe, 1939) — Britain gave 
Poland a "blank-check treaty" if they would hold 
out 99%-German Danzig from Germany — the last 
adjustment of the Versailles Treaty (ending WWI) 



83 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

that penalized Germany. Also, Britain and France 
refused alliance with Russia against the "fascist 
menace" (although Bolshevik Russia was seriously 
threatened by Nazi aggression, unlike Danzig-less 
Poland, not to mention distant Great Britain) 
and thus pushed USSR to German side in fear. 
Poland was overwhelmingly outnumbered and 
still refused to return German Danzig. Pretext: 
Germany invaded Poland without provocation. 
(Nonsense; allied war propaganda. Poland was so 
surprised that they were already fully mobilized 
and standing on the border on September 1,1939.) 

World War II (Pacific, 1941) — The United 
States New Deal administration sought entry to 
the European theatre (above) and required an "at- 
tack" since 80% of Americans opposed 'bailing out 
Britain" again. Japanese were strangled by British 
blockade aided by "neutral" U.S. ships; Japanese 
funds in U.S. were seized by U.S. government, and 
Japanese emissaries for peace were insulted and 
scorned. Pretext: Japan attacked Pearl Harbor 
naval installation — few, if any innocent U.S. ci- 
vilians injured. (Japan knew it would be dragged 
into the war and would lose; it struck first to de- 
lay the inevitable. Japanese "bushido" code was 
offended — deliberately and provocatively — by 
U.S. statists.) 

Korean War — Artificial division of Korea 
(WWII) between a Northern communist dictator- 
ship and a Southern, pro-U.S. State dictatorship; 
U.S. entered to prop up colonies France and Japan 
were abandoning in Southeast Asia for variety 



84 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

of corporate-interest and Soviet-containment 
reasons. Pretext: Communist aggression which 
involved China and Russia. (China attacked the 
U.S. after American troops threatened to cross 
the Yalu River into China. Russia sat back and 
sold arms — as the U.S. had done before landing 
troops.) 

Vietnam War — U.S. attempted to keep former 
French Indo-China from passing into Eastern 
bloc. (See Korean War; this was a continuation 
from 1954.) As became obvious immediately after, 
when China switched over to U.S. side, "Commu- 
nist" countries are not necessarily threats to U.S. 
Pretext: Defend South Vietnamese, who wanted 
Western-style democracy, from Communist form 
of statists. (South Vietnamese were split and there 
was never anything even as "free" as democracy 
there under the various generals and the Diem 
dictatorship.) 

El Salvador — Certain U.S. industries and 
banks have heavy investments in Latin Ameri- 
can countries and fear their expropriation by 
Communist or Marxist governments. Pretext: 
Salvadorans want democracy, not communism. 
(Salvadorans voted in U.S. -monitored election 
and got a genuine fascist government [ARENA 
party of Roberto D Aubuisson] and massive mur- 
der of "democrats" — let alone communists — by 
ARENA death squads. The U.S. then overruled 
the results of an election they had demanded in 
the first place.) 



85 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Iraq War I — U.S. sought to preserve its in- 
terests in Saudi Arabian oil fields, fearing that if 
Kuwait fell and former U.S. ally Saddam Hussein 
enriched himself from oil profits there, then Saudi 
Arabia might be next. Pretext: Iraq invaded Ku- 
wait (separated from Iraq by British in 1932) to 
regain its port and to seize oil fields on the theory 
that they were using a slant drill to "drink the 
milkshake" of Iraq's al-Rumaila fields. 

Afghan War — U.S. and U.K. attempt to se- 
cure Afghanistan to protect a proposed natural 
gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan and 
India passing right through the Kandahar prov- 
ince. This, in an effort to counteract perceived 
Russo-Iranian energy trade in the region. Pre- 
text: Taliban gave aid and comfort to 9/11 attack 
coordinator Osama bin Laden, oppressed women, 
and served as a training haven for Islamic funda- 
mentalist terrorists. 

Iraq War II — U.S. continued to perceive Iraq 
as a threat to its oil interests in the middle east, 
especially after Iraq's scorched-earth retreat from 
the Kuwaiti oil fields in 1991. In addition, per- 
sonal grudges may have played a part, since the 
sitting president's father had once been targeted 
for assassination by Hussein. Pretext: Saddam 
Hussein's repeated scofflawing of numerous U.N. 
resolutions and rumours that Iraq still pursued 
weapons of mass destruction. 

By the way, those quickie explanations are not 
meant to convince you that the U.S. was wrong 
and the other sides were right. The agorist view- 



86 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

point is that the U.S. State was wrong and its war 
opponents were wrong. Both or either could have 
avoided any of the above wars. 

And, before we forget, there is an obvious third 
way the North American non- state defends itself 
against the State around it, if it is agorist. The pro- 
tection agencies form larger syndicates than the 
ones they form in the case we mentioned above of a 
local protection company going renegade. If all the 
policy holders of all the insurance and protection 
companies are threatened by invasion, they will 
throw all their combined resources (and higher 
technology, judging by free enterprise's past per- 
formance) on defence of the common ground. 

Fourth, the people would rise up in militias or 
guerrilla units to defend their incredibly free so- 
ciety. (There were advance hints of this strategy 
when the Ukrainian Anarchist army, under Nestor 
Makhno, had no trouble raising militia to protect 
the local fanners from roving armies of Reds and 
Whites during the Russian Revolution.) 

Fifth, most wars have had a strong Economic 
component. Often access to goods or natural 
resources was barred by protectionist State Eco- 
nomic policies. The anarchy would have full free 
trade with full access. Anyone wanting anything 
produced in the North American anarchy could 
easily buy it — without taxes and tariffs and at 
a cheaper price than anywhere else. (Notice how 
giant Communist China went out of its way not 
to conquer tiny Hong Kong, although the British 
were ready to toss it to them any time they asked, 



87 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

and finally did. Even now, Hong Kong has not 
seen Red Chinese tanks rolling through its streets 
to crush its capitalist minions. In fact, much of 
China has become a mirror of Hong Kong, with 
Party leaders and the People's Liberation Army 
growing rich on market activities white, black, and 
grey. Check also the little free ports and cities of 
Monaco, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Singapore and 
San Marino.) 

Sixth, (and we'll have to stop eventually, so 
let it be here) the States will quarrel amongst 
themselves. Since the anarchy threatens no State 
immediately (point two) (long-term, it does, as a 
shining example of better conditions), but other 
States with standing militaries do threaten at all 
times, what State would want the easy-access to 
resources (point five) in the anarchy cut off by an- 
other State using it? That could mean war — but 
among the States while the Anarchy freely sells 
to all sides without favor or penalty. 

Critics of market anarchy often try to have their 
cake and eat it too. For example, they may argue 
that there are too few States — "what happens if 
the States gang up?" — and at the same time too 
many — "how can one anarchy survive among all 
those States?" As in the case of historical examples 
such as Revolutionary France and Revolutionary 
Russia where the surrounding States did gang up 
to crush the new type of State, if the country is 
big enough, it will survive even foreign interfer- 
ence, even in the middle of civil war (which both 
experienced) — let alone agorist peace. 



88 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Additional tactics for defence and reasons for 
nonaggression are left as an exercise for the reader. 



The Agorist Path 

/f^ etting from here (statism) to there (agorism) 



\_JTis the second and perhaps defining character- 
istic of the latter. Unlike libertarianism, agorism 
offers both goal and path as an internally consis- 
tent package deal. 

The short answer is given in Axiom Four. A 
longer answer is "applying Counter -Economics to 
all your actions and linking preferentially with 
others who do so creates an ever-bigger agora." 
How that works — and what two things you need 
to watch for — is an excellent chapter with which 
to end this primer. 




89 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Chapter Eight 
Applied Agorism 



At this concluding point, we would like to 
tie together all we have learned. Thus we 
can see clearly the path to be taken with 
a view to ending up with a new ability: to figure 
out how each of us can best walk that path to our 
own advantage. So let us begin by visualizing that 
pathway. 

The Road From Agora 

(Q ince we have some picture of an agorist soci- 



Oety and an all-too-good picture of a statist so- 
ciety, let us connect them by slowly degenerating 
one into the other. Since it is usually more difficult 
to see how the "real here-and-now" becomes the 
possible, let's run the film backwards. Let us start 
with an agorist society and run backwards in time 
to what we have now, a statist society. 

The State exists because of a mystique that 
confers upon it the sanction of the victim. Thus, 
we each must have lost our sanction of the State 
for the agora to have come about. Very well, run- 
ning the film of this in-between period backward, 




90 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

it should appear that some "mental plague" is 
infecting contented agorists to persuade them, 
one by one, to give up their freedom and submit to 
control by some embryonic government (a criminal 
gang with a good line of buncombe). 

At first the State would be able to tax and mo- 
bilize only its followers. It would be a voluntary 
organization — sadomasochistic, to be sure, but 
still tolerated by the unaffected agorists. Every time 
the State tried to prey on insured agorists, it would 
be brought to arbitration and restitution enforced. 

Still, against all reason, the infection grows 
and the State is too powerful now for restitution 
to be enforced. Some privileged people are able to 
live successfully off plunder and be protected by 
the mindless subjects of the new State who will 
sacrifice their own property, and even their lives, 
so that some may live off others. (Remember, this 
is the opposite of how people think sanely because 
we are deliberately going backwards. It should be 
a comfort to know that this route is highly unlikely 
in a forward direction.) 

The State now has its power elite, ruling class, 
conspiracy, or whatever term you like best. They 
can distribute some of this unearned wealth to 
bribe agorists who have little conviction (and a 
weak will) to join the infected masses. Now the 
State reaches a level that permits it not only to 
stave off the protection companies, but actually 
to attack them. At this point, the companies go 
"underground" or Counter-Economic, still enforc- 
ing contracts among the remaining agorists and 



91 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

those who are not being very well defended by the 
inefficient State apparatus, as well as those who 
are not in favor with the Statists' top-level elite. 
Otherwise, people look out for Statist enforcers as 
much as possible and develop evasive techniques in 
order to keep their manufacture, trade and services 
from detection and capture. They develop Counter- 
Economic techniques. And they keep on going. 

Finally, the State compels its new citizens to 
give up their gold for worthless paper; and then 
the State divides into several States and mobilizes 
the citizens to get to see which ruling class will 
get the biggest share of the tax plunder. Sound 
like we've gone a little crazy in imagining anyone 
permitting this? True enough, but unfortunately, 
this craziest picture of all describes nothing less 
than the reality we live in right now. 

The path from here to agora now becomes blind- 
ingly obvious. As more people reject the State's 
mystifications — nationalism, pseudo-Economics, 
false threats, and betrayed political promises — 
the Counter- Economy grows both vertically and 
horizontally. Horizontally, it involves more and 
more people who turn more and more of their ac- 
tivities toward the counter-economic; vertically, it 
means new structures (businesses and services) 
grow specifically to serve the Counter- Economy 
(safe communication links, arbitrators, insurance 
for specifically "illegal" activities, early forms of 
protection technology, and even guards and protec- 
tors). Eventually, the "underground" breaks into 
the overground where most people are agorists, 



92 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

few are statists, and the nearest State enforcement 
cannot effectively crush them. 

These agorist condensations are highly vulnera- 
ble when first exposed but will probably evaporate 
back into the anonymous masses when seriously 
threatened. Finally, one grows large enough to de- 
fend itself against the nearest State (see Chapter 
Seven regarding the many ways that it can defend 
itself). Others rally to it and those agorists stay- 
ing "home" under States' rule become ever-richer 
trading ports with the first agora condensations. 

The rapid collapse of State taxation ability at 
this point will push the State to rely even more 
on inflation to support itself. The Counter- Econ- 
omists abandon fiat money ever-faster and use 
gold and trusted agorist gold warehouse receipts 
("hard- money cheques"). The runaway inflation 
approaches what Ludwig Von Mises termed "the 
Crack-Up Boom," paper money is completely aban- 
doned, like 1923 German reichsmarks and 1781 
U.S. Continentals and 1787 French assignats. (See 
the aforementioned novel Alongside Night for a 
thrilling presentation of this scenario.) 

At the critical point when the protection compa- 
nies can protect anyone who asks for a policy and is 
willing to pay for it, the State loses its monopoly of 
legitimized coercion. Once the power elite realizes 
that "it has come to this," they will throw all the 
force they have left at the agora. The protection 
companies will defend the agorists, the taxpayers 
will flee the State to the free market, the military 
will desert as the State runs out of (acceptable) 



93 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

pay and supplies for them, and the State will 
collapse. (The last sentence describes the Agorist 
Revolution, accept no substitute behavior involv- 
ing agorist "attacks" on the State. We are strictly 
defensive. Some people with grudges against the 
State, incited because of State-murdered loved 
ones, may undertake some spectacular commando 
raids and such, but that would not be the norm.) 

Having spelled all this out, we still have one 
big question left unanswered: why has this not 
happened already? 

The False Dichotomy 

Divide and conquer has been a statist motto 
and tactic since Julius Caesar. The division of 
libertarianism from Counter- Economics has many 
causes but several can be attributed to Statist 
encouragement of illogic, irrationality, and sheer 
mysticism. Nowhere is this more evident than 
in the very field of thought confronting us: moral 
philosophy and economics. (It is noteworthy here 
to remember that the first economist, Adam Smith, 
was a professor of Moral Philosophy.) 

Morally, the State and its clerical toadies have 
separated the moral from the practical. Several 
strains of religious thought, Kantian altruism, 
down to Hegel's explicit worship of the State, 
have told people to try to live morally, but always 
fail; then the people were to let the State (with 
the blessings of the Established Church of Statist 
ideology) punish them. 



94 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Economically, the Court Economists have dis- 
torted and changed the laws of economics to suit 
the ruling group. Mercantilism, economic nation- 
alism, Fabianism, fascism, Keynsianism, mon- 
etarism, supply-side Economics, socialism, social 
democracy, progressivism, New Deal, Fair Deal, 
Square Deal, New Frontier, Just Society, Great 
Society, war communism, unspecified Hope and 
Change, and middle-of-the-road-ism are political 
frauds and economic nonsense. In most cases, the 
priests, intellectuals, and rulers knew what they 
were doing and continued doing it until the snake 
oil no longer sold. Then they simply slapped a new 
label on the same noxious brew. 

Most people are ignorant of economics today and 
remain frightened by the subject. Most people think 
morality is either impossible, irrelevant, or some- 
thing they can do nothing about but which will catch 
up with them eventually, either while they are alive 
or after their death. As many sages have repeated, 
the truth will set you free. Even the cases where the 
truth was dimly seen "as through a glass darkly," 
the liberating effects have been visible. Rebellious 
religious sects often morphed into authoritarian 
cults, but some achieved incredible freedom, such 
as the Rhode Island Baptists, the Pennsylvanian 
Quakers, and the American Deists, who advanced 
the American Revolutionary ideology. Adam Smith 
and his immediate followers in Europe created such 
an impact in the early 19th Century trade policies 
that a wave of economic prosperity swept the world 
with just a lowering of trade barriers toward freedom. 



95 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Then came World War I and the heyday of so- 
cialism, justified largely by the "failure" of free 
enterprise. (It did not fail, it was stifled by internal 
"progressive" regulation and external war "emer- 
gencies.") With the collapse of socialism and its 
various offspring such as Soviet Communism and 
American Liberalism, a vacuum has opened for 
an ideology to inspire and guide thinking people. 
Though the States of the world give lip-service to 
various socialist ideals, they are aware (or their 
Higher Circles are aware) that socialist ideals are 
losing their ability to beguile. Perhaps something 
called Libertarianism, having given up its remain- 
ing ties to Liberty while promising to provide it 
through Statism, will be the next bottle of snake 
oil the confidence men of the State will offer to 
maintain our sanctions. 

The State in the Mind 

The State has guns and men to use them. As 
we have seen, however, it not only can fail to 
coerce a rebellious majority, it cannot even stop 
an enterprising minority of black marketeers 
and other Counter-Economists. The State must 
be defeated in each person's mind. Once you per- 
sonally reject its hold over you, you are as free as 
your intelligence, your will to take risks, and the 
aid of your allies can keep you. New converts to 
Christianity describe a similar process, which they 
call being "born again." Even in darkest Russia 
or China, entrepreneurs thrive and — for a high 



96 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

price — buy their well-being and additional free- 
dom. Of course, any North American, Australian, 
or European reading this should have a relatively 
easier time and a higher payoff. 

What may be needed — in addition to spread- 
ing the word and living it — is some form of 
agorist psychology. Perhaps we can use the ex- 
amples of therapy for childhood mistreatment or 
consciousness-raising groups for feminists, gays, 
and other obviously oppressed groups. We can all 
get together in small affinity groups of trusted 
friends and allies to dig our contradictions out of 
our unconscious. We can flush out the State from 
our heads by ourselves or together or both ways. 

Every law that you obey must be reexamined 
with the thought, how does it protect life and prop- 
erty 1 ? If, as almost every law in our system does, it 
actually constricts the market or steals outright, it 
should not be obeyed save when force is reported 
nearby and menacing you directly. 

Once you have successfully arranged your life to 
live in the free- market anarchy to the extent that 
you can accept the risks — the higher the risks, 
the bigger the payoff, including freedom — you can 
and will quite naturally add to your ranks. Risks 
are lowered by trustworthy marketeers working 
together. Soon everyone will know agorists are the 
most trustworthy of all. Come runaway inflation 
and depressions, the unemployed and bankrupt 
in the State's Economy will see unlimited jobs and 
entrepreneurial opportunities, not to mention the 
preserved wealth for capital, that the Counter- 



97 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 

Economy offers and join it if only to keep from 
starving, losing their homes, their family support, 
and their remaining self-respect. 

Remember, an agorist is one who lives counter- 
economically without guilt for his or her heroic, 
day-to-day actions, with the old libertarian mo- 
rality of never violating another's person or prop- 
erty. There is no "membership card" to fool you; 
an agorist is one who lives agorism. Accept no 
counterfeits. 

There are agorists "trying to live up to it." There 
are, of course, liars who will claim to be anything. 
As Yoda said so succinctly, "Do. Or do not. There 
is no try." 

That's Agorism. 



98 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



Afterword 



Beyond Basic Agorism 

A few words may be appropriate here for 
the reader who enjoyed the primer but 
wishes to go on to the hard stuff. There 
are two ways to go. 

Horizontally, one can delve deeply into eco- 
nomics, Counter-Economics, Revisionist History, 
and some areas not really covered here, such as 
libertarian philosophy, psychology, and literature. 
There are plenty of sources for those who wish to 
check out some of our claims here or specialize in 
an area of personal excitement. 

Vertically, one has fewer choices because few 
publications have emerged so far from this brand- 
new movement. This author has published New 
Libertarian Manifesto — available from KoPubCo 
— for those who wish to go beyond mere simple 
agorism to become activists, advance protection 
agents defending the Counter- Economy by public 
relations, education... and other means. 

Websites, such as agorism. info and agorist. 
com, have sprung up, created by agorists eager to 
extend theory into practical action. 



99 



Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



A full-sized book — Counter -Economics — is 
awaiting publication at KoPubCo, [though it lay 
unfinished at the time of SEK3's death. — VK\. It 
will emphasize examples and practice, the theory 
being as much as already covered here. 




Samuel Edward Konkin III — An Agorist Primer 



This First Edition of An Agorist Primer is set in 
Century Schoolbook type, a very pleasant and 
readable font, at 12 points on 14 point leading. 
Titles are in Academy Engraved and Baskerville 
Old Face. Typesetting, layout, and cover design 
was performed by Black Dawn Graphics, which 
has provided services to KoPubCo since 1983. 



101 



About the Author 



Samuel Edward Konkin III was a vanguard move- 
ment theorist and hard-core activist since the 
historic split between libertarians and conserva- 
tives at the YAF convention in St. Louis, 1969. In the 
subsequent three and a half decades, he served as edi- 
tor and publisher of the longest-lived libertarian publi- 
cation, beginning as Laissez-Faire! (1970), then as New 
Libertarian Notes (1971-75), New Libertarian Weekly 
(1975-77, the longest-running libertarian weekly), and 
New Libertarian (1978-1990). He wrote the seminal 
work on agorism, New Libertarian Manifesto, in 1980. 

He has coined the following terms and concepts, 
many of which have turned up in all libertarian pub- 
lications: Counter-Economics, agorism, minarchy, 
partyarchy, anti-principles, Left Libertarianism, anar- 
chozionism, "Browne-out," red market, Kochtopus, and 
more. He has influenced the works of authors such as 
J. Neil Schulman (Alongside Night) and Victor Koman 
(Solomon's Knife), who both had their first professional 
fiction sales in the pages of his publications. 

Mr. Konkin served as Executive Director of the 
Agorist Institute, an outreach organization promulgat- 
ing the principles of agorism and counter-economics. 
He was guest of honor at science-fiction conventions 
and libertarian gatherings and was a seasoned world 
traveller. His unfinished magnum opus, Counter- 
Economics, will see publication in the near future. 
Mr. Konkin died February 23, 2004. 



Now that you've read it in electronic form, you might 
want to order the keepsake KoPubCo hardcover first 
edition of Samuel Edward Konkin Ill's masterpiece. 




Counter-Economics, 
Total Freedom, 
and You 

Samuel Edward Konkin III 



kopubco.com/aap_hb.html 
ISBN 978-0-9777649-4-5 




KoPubCo is the publishing division of 
The Triplanetary Corporation 



mm 




The classic of libertarian theory and practice is 
back in print in a newly re-typeset, pocket-sized 
edition! One of the most influential works in the 
| field, New Libertarian Manifesto is more timely 
than ever. Includes critiques by Murray N. 
Rothbard, Robert LeFevre, and Erwin S. 
| "Filthy Pierre" Strauss, and responses by 
Samuel Edward Konkin III. 



Konkin's writings are to be welcomed. 
Because we need a lot more poly- 
centrism in the movement. Because 
| he shakes up Partyarchs who tend 
to fall into unthinking compla- 
cency. And especially because 
he cares deeply about liberty and can 
read and write, qualities which seem to be 
going out of style in the libertarian movement." 

—Murray N. Rothbard, Ph.D. 



kopubco.com/nlm_trade.html 
ISBN 978-0-9777649-2-1 




KoPubCo is the publishing division of 
The Triplanetary Corporation 



mm 

From 1970 to 1990, New Libertarian — in all its myriad forms 
— published many of the luminaries of the movement and 
served as a springboard for new and upcoming counter-econ- 
mic stars. Nearly all back issues are available from KoPubCo 
in either their original form or as quality photocopies. 




Laissez Faire! (1970) 

New Libertarian Notes (1971 to 1975) 

New Libertarian Weekly (1975 to 1977) 

New Libertarian (1978 to 1990) 

New Libertarian Manifesto (1980-2006) 

Strategy of the New Libertarian Alliance (1981 to 1983) 

New Libertarian Notes & Calendar (1985 to 1987) 

New Libertarian: The Newsletter (1988 to 1990) 

Robert Anton Wilson in New Libertarian Publications 

TheAgorist Quarterly 

Writers Appearing in New Libertarian Publications 



The New Christmas Ctasle! 

i — — i 



of 




Th£ <§>£er£t §torg 
of Santa's 'RjzM §on 

Samuel Edward Konkin III 

and Victor Koman 


kopubco.com/tloac_pb.html 
ISBN 978-0-9777649-5-2 




KoPubCo is the publishing division of 
The Triplanetary Corporation